Feed-in tariffs have been enacted on a state by state basis in Australia to encourage investment in renewable energy by providing above commercial rates for electricity generated from sources such as rooftop photovoltaic panels or wind turbines.[9] The schemes in place focus on residential scale infrastructure by having limits that effectively exclude larger scale developments such as wind farms. Feed-in tariffs schemes in Australia started at a premium🚨but have mechanisms by which the price paid for electricity decreases over time to be equivalent or below the commercial rate.[9] All the schemes now in place in Australia are ""net"" schemes whereby the householder is only paid for surplus electricity over and above what is actually used. In the past

There is dispute about the level of subsidies paid to the fossil fuel industry in Australia. The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) argues that according to the definitions of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)🚨fossil fuel production and use is subsidised in Australia by means of direct payments

Australia ratified the Kyoto Protocol in December 2007 under the then newly elected Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. Evidence suggests Australia will meet its targets required under this protocol. Australia had not ratified the Kyoto Protocol until then🚨due to concerns over a loss of competitiveness with the US

Survey results suggest that there is considerable public support for the use of renewable energy and energy efficiency in Australia. In one recent survey🚨74% of respondents favoured a ""greenhouse strategy based mainly on energy efficiency and renewable energy

There is a considerable movement known as The Transition Decade to transition Australia's entire energy system to renewable by 2020. Voluntary uptake of GreenPower🚨a Government program initiated in 1997 whereby people can pay extra for electricity that is generated from renewable sources

Australia has a very high potential for renewable energy.[103] Therefore🚨the transition to a renewable energy system is gaining momentum in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.[104] Among them several studies have examined the feasibility of a transition to a 100% renewable electricity systems

Media related to Renewable energy in Australia at Wikimedia Commons"🚨What form of renewable power is australia's largest potential energy source?

EF5 (T10-T11)🚨Tornado intensity can be measured by in situ or remote sensing measurements, but since these are impractical for wide scale use, intensity is usually inferred via proxies, such as damage. The Fujita scale and the Enhanced Fujita scale rate tornadoes by the damage caused.[1][2] The Enhanced Fujita Scale was an upgrade to the older Fujita scale, with engineered (by expert elicitation) wind estimates and better damage descriptions, but was designed so that a tornado rated on the Fujita scale would receive the same numerical rating. An EF0 tornado will probably damage trees but not substantial structures, whereas an EF5 tornado can rip buildings off their foundations leaving them bare and even deform large skyscrapers. The similar TORRO scale ranges from a T0 for extremely weak tornadoes to T11 for the most powerful known tornadoes. Doppler radar data, photogrammetry, and ground swirl patterns (cycloidal marks) may also be analyzed to determine intensity and award a rating. Tornadoes vary in intensity regardless of shape, size, and location, though strong tornadoes are typically larger than weak tornadoes. The association with track length and duration also varies, although longer track (and longer lived) tornadoes tend to be stronger.[3] In the case of violent tornadoes, only a small portion of the path area is of violent intensity; most of the higher intensity is from subvortices.[4] In the United States, 80% of tornadoes are EF0 and EF1 (T0 through T3) tornadoes. The rate of occurrence drops off quickly with increasing strengthless than 1% are violent tornadoes (EF4, T8 or stronger).[5] For many years, before the advent of Doppler radar, scientists had nothing more than educated guesses as to the speed of the winds in a tornado. The only evidence indicating the wind speeds found in the tornado was the damage left behind by tornadoes which struck populated areas. Some believed they reach 400?mph (640?km/h); others thought they might exceed 500?mph (800?km/h), and perhaps even be supersonic. One can still find these incorrect guesses in some old (until the 1960s) literature, such as the original Fujita Intensity Scale developed by Dr. Tetsuya Theodore Fujita in the early '70s. However, one can find accounts (e.g. [1]; be sure to scroll down) of some remarkable work done in this field by a U.S. Army soldier, Sergeant John Park Finley. In 1971, Dr. Tetsuya Theodore Fujita introduced the idea for a scale of tornado winds. With the help of colleague Allen Pearson, he created and introduced what came to be called the Fujita scale in 1973. This is what the F stands for in F1, F2, etc. The scale was based on a relationship between the Beaufort scale and the Mach number scale; the low end of F1 on his scale corresponds to the low end of B12 on the Beaufort scale, and the low end of F12 corresponds to the speed of sound at sea level, or Mach 1. In practice, tornadoes are only assigned categories F0 through F5. The TORRO scale, created by the Tornado and Storm Research Organisation (TORRO), was developed in 1974 and published a year later. The TORRO scale has 12 levels, which cover a broader range with tighter graduations. It ranges from a T0 for extremely weak tornadoes to T11 for the most powerful known tornadoes. T0-T1 roughly correspond to F0, T2-T3 to F1, and so on. While T10+ would be approximately an F5, the highest tornado rated to date on the TORRO scale was a T8.[6][7] There is some debate as to the usefulness of the TORRO scale over the Fujita scalewhile it may be helpful for statistical purposes to have more levels of tornado strength, often the damage caused could be created by a large range of winds, rendering it hard to narrow the tornado down to a single TORRO scale category. Research conducted in the late 1980s and 1990s suggested that, even with the implication of the Fujita scale, tornado winds were notoriously overestimated, especially in significant and violent tornadoes. Because of this, in 2006, the American Meteorological Society introduced the Enhanced Fujita scale, to help assign realistic wind speeds to tornado damage. The scientists specifically designed the scale so that a tornado assessed on the Fujita scale and the Enhanced Fujita scale would receive the same ranking. The EF-scale is more specific in detailing the degrees of damage on different types of structures for a given wind speed. While the F-scale goes from F0 to F12 in theory, the EF-scale is capped at EF5, which is defined as "winds 200?mph (320?km/h)".[8] In the United States, the Enhanced Fujita scale went into effect on February 2, 2007 for tornado damage assessments and the Fujita scale is no longer used. The first observation which confirmed that F5 winds could occur happened on April 26, 1991. A tornado near Red Rock, Oklahoma was monitored by scientists using a portable Doppler radar, an experimental radar device that measures wind speed. Near the tornado's peak intensity, they recorded a wind speed of 115ÿ120?m/s (260ÿ270?mph). Though the portable radar had uncertainty of I5ÿ10?m/s (11ÿ22?mph), this reading was probably within the F5 range, confirming that tornadoes were capable of violent winds found nowhere else on earth. Eight years later, during the 1999 Oklahoma tornado outbreak of May 3, 1999, another scientific team was monitoring an exceptionally violent tornado (one which would eventually kill 36?people in the Oklahoma City metropolitan area). At about 7:00 pm, they recorded one measurement of 301?I?20?mph (484?I?32?km/h),[9] 50?mph (80?km/h) faster than the previous record. Though this reading is just short of the theoretical F6 rating, the measurement was taken more than 100 feet (30?m) in the air, where winds are typically stronger than at the surface.[citation needed] In rating tornadoes, only surface wind speeds, or the wind speeds indicated by the damage resulting from the tornado, are taken into account. Also, in practice, the F6 rating is not used. While scientists have long theorized that extremely low pressures might occur in the center of tornadoes, there were no measurements to confirm it. A few home barometers had survived close passes by tornadoes, recording values as low as 24?inHg (810?hPa), but these measurements were highly uncertain.[10] However, on June 24, 2003, a group of researchers successfully dropped devices called "turtles" into an F4 tornado near Manchester, South Dakota, one of which measured a pressure drop of more than 100?hPa (3.0?inHg) as the tornado passed directly overhead.[11] Still, tornadoes are widely varied, so meteorologists are still conducting research to determine if these values are typical or not. In the United States, F0 and F1 (T0 through T3) tornadoes account for 80% of all tornadoes. The rate of occurrence drops off quickly with increasing strengthviolent tornadoes (stronger than F4, T8), account for less than 1% of all tornado reports.[5] Worldwide, strong tornadoes account for an even smaller percentage of total tornadoes. Violent tornadoes are extremely rare outside of the United States, Canada and Bangladesh. F5 and EF5 tornadoes are rare, occurring on average once every few years. An F5 tornado was reported in Elie, Manitoba in Canada, on June 22, 2007. Before that, the last confirmed F5 was the 1999 Bridge CreekÿMoore tornado, which killed 36 people on May 3, 1999.[12] Nine EF5 tornadoes have occurred in the United States, in Greensburg, Kansas on May 4, 2007; Parkersburg, Iowa on May 25, 2008; Smithville, Mississippi, Philadelphia, Mississippi, Hackleburg, Alabama and Rainsville, Alabama (four separate tornadoes) on April 27, 2011; Joplin, Missouri on May 22, 2011 and El Reno, Oklahoma on May 24, 2011. On May 20, 2013 a confirmed EF5 tornado again struck Moore, Oklahoma. A typical tornado has winds of 110?mph (180?km/h) or less, is approximately 250 feet (76?m) across, and travels a mile (1.6?km) or so before dissipating.[citation needed] However, tornadic behavior is extremely variable; these figures represent only statistical probability. Two tornadoes that look almost exactly the same can produce drastically different effects. Also, two tornadoes which look very different can produce similar damage. This is due to the fact that tornadoes form by several different mechanisms, and also that they follow a life cycle which causes the same tornado to change in appearance over time. People in the path of a tornado should never attempt to determine its strength as it approaches. Between 1950 and 2014 in the United States, 222?people have been killed by EF1 tornadoes, and 21 have been killed by EF0 tornadoes.[15][16] The vast majority of tornadoes are designated EF1 or EF0, also known as "weak" tornadoes. However, weak is a relative term for tornadoes, as even these can cause significant damage. F0 and F1 tornadoes are typically short-livedsince 1980 almost 75% of tornadoes rated weak stayed on the ground for 1 mile (1.6?km) or less.[12] However, in this time, they can cause both damage and fatalities. EF0 (T0-T1) damage is characterized by superficial damage to structures and vegetation. Well-built structures are typically unscathed, sometimes sustaining broken windows, with minor damage to roofs and chimneys. Billboards and large signs can be knocked down. Trees may have large branches broken off, and can be uprooted if they have shallow roots. Any tornado that is confirmed but causes no damage (i.e. remains in open fields) is always rated EF0 as well. EF1 (T2-T3) damage has caused significantly more fatalities than that caused by EF0 tornadoes. At this level, damage to mobile homes and other temporary structures becomes significant, and cars and other vehicles can be pushed off the road or flipped. Permanent structures can suffer major damage to their roofs. EF2 (T4-T5) tornadoes are the lower end of "significant", and yet are stronger than most tropical cyclones (though tropical cyclones affect a much larger area and their winds take place for a much longer duration). Well-built structures can suffer serious damage, including roof loss, and collapse of some exterior walls may occur at poorly built structures. Mobile homes, however, are totally destroyed. Vehicles can be lifted off the ground, and lighter objects can become small missiles, causing damage outside of the tornado's main path. Wooded areas will have a large percentage of their trees snapped or uprooted. EF3 (T6-T7) damage is a serious risk to life and limb and the point at which a tornado statistically becomes significantly more destructive and deadly. Few parts of affected buildings are left standing; well-built structures lose all outer and some inner walls. Unanchored homes are swept away, and homes with poor anchoring may collapse entirely. Small vehicles and similarly sized objects are lifted off the ground and tossed as projectiles. Wooded areas will suffer almost total loss of vegetation, and some tree debarking may occur. Statistically speaking, EF3 is the maximum level that allows for reasonably effective residential sheltering in place in a first floor interior room closest to the center of the house (the most widespread tornado sheltering procedure in America for those with no basement or underground storm shelter). While isolated examples exist of people surviving E/F5 impacts in their homesone survivor of the Jarrell F5 sheltered in a bathtub and was miraculously blown to safety as her house disintegrated[17]surviving an E/F5 impact outside of a robust and properly constructed underground storm shelter is statistically unlikely. EF4 (T8-T9) damage typically results in a total loss of the affected structure. Well-built homes are reduced to a short pile of medium-sized debris on the foundation. Homes with poor or no anchoring will be swept completely away. Large, heavy vehicles, including airplanes, trains, and large trucks, can be pushed over, flipped repeatedly or picked up and thrown. Large, healthy trees are entirely debarked and snapped off close to the ground or uprooted altogether and turned into flying projectiles. Passenger cars and similarly sized objects can be picked up and flung for considerable distances. EF4 damage can be expected to level even the most robustly built homes, making the common practice of sheltering in an interior room on the ground floor of a residence insufficient to ensure survival. A storm shelter, reinforced basement or other subterranean shelter is considered necessary to provide any reasonable expectation of safety against EF4 damage. EF5 (T10-T11) damage represents the upper limit of tornado power, and destruction is almost always total. An EF5 tornado pulls well-built, well-anchored homes off their foundations and into the air before obliterating them, flinging the wreckage for miles and sweeping the foundation clean. Large, steel reinforced structures such as schools are completely leveled. Tornadoes of this intensity tend to shred and scour low-lying grass and vegetation from the ground. Very little recognizable structural debris is generated by EF5 damage, with most materials reduced to a coarse mix of small, granular particles and dispersed evenly across the tornado's damage path. Large, multi-ton steel frame vehicles and farm equipment are often mangled beyond recognition and deposited miles away or reduced entirely to unrecognizable component parts. The official description of this damage highlights the extreme nature of the destruction, noting that "incredible phenomena will occur"; historically, this has included such awesome displays of power as twisting skyscrapers, leveling entire communities, and stripping asphalt from roadbeds. Despite their relative rarity, the damage caused by EF5 tornadoes represents a disproportionately extreme hazard to life and limb since 1950 in the United States, only 58 tornadoes (0.1% of all reports) have been designated F5 or EF5, and yet these have been responsible for more than 1300 deaths and 14,000 injuries (21.5% and 13.6%, respectively).[12][18]

Livingstone🚨

January 1, 1968🚨Most seat belt laws in the United States are left to the states. However, the first seat belt law was a federal law, Title 49 of the United States Code, Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety Standard, which took effect on January 1, 1968, that required all vehicles (except buses) to be fitted with seat belts in all designated seating positions.[1] This law has since been modified to require three-point seat belts in outboard-seating positions, and finally three-point seat belts in all seating positions.[2] Initially, seat belt use was voluntary. New York was the first state to pass a law which required vehicle occupants to wear seat belts, a law that came into effect on December 1, 1984. Officer Nicholas Cimmino of the link Westchester County Department of Public Safety wrote the nations first ticket for such violation. U.S. seatbelt laws may be subject to primary enforcement or secondary enforcement. Primary enforcement allows a police officer to stop and ticket a driver if he or she observes a violation. Secondary enforcement means that a police officer may only stop or cite a driver for a seatbelt violation if the driver committed another primary violation (such as speeding, running a stop sign, etc.) at the same time. New Hampshire is the only U.S. state that does not by law require adult drivers to wear safety belts while operating a motor vehicle. In 18 of the 50 states, the seat belt law is considered a secondary offense, which means that a police officer cannot stop and ticket a driver for the sole offense of not wearing a seatbelt. (One exception to this is Colorado, where children not properly restrained is a primary offense and brings a much larger fine.) If a driver commits a primary violation (e.g., for speeding) he may additionally be charged for not wearing a seatbelt. In most states the seat belt law was originally a secondary offense; in many it was later changed to a primary offense: California was the first state to do this, in 1993. Of the 30 with primary seat belt laws, all but 8, Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, and Texas, originally had only secondary enforcement laws. This table contains a brief summary of all seatbelt laws in the United States.[3][4] This list includes only seatbelt laws, which often do not themselves apply to children; however, all 50 states and the District of Columbia have separate child restraint laws. Keep in mind these fines are the base fines only. In many cases considerable extra fees such as the head injury fund and court security fees can mark up the fine to almost five times as much in some cases. These are also "first offense" fines; a subsequent offense may be much higher. under 18 in all seats 1 Colorado and Missouri's law is Secondary for adults but Primary for under the age of 16. 2 Idaho, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Virginia's law is Secondary for adults but Primary for under 18. 3 Kansas, Maryland, New Jersey, and North Carolina's law is Secondary Enforcement for rear seat occupants (18+ in Kansas). 4 These states assess points on one's driving record for the seat belt violation. 5 In California- An additional penalty of $24 shall be levied upon every $10 or fraction thereof, of every fine, penalty, or forfeiture imposed by and collected by the court for criminal offenses, including all traffic offenses, except parking offenses as defined in subdivision (i) of Penal Code 1463. The additional penalty is calculated as follows: ? State penalty required by PC 1464 $10, ? County penalty required by GC 76000(e), $ 7 ? Court facilities construction penalty required by GC 70372(a),$ 3 ? DNA Identification Fund penalty required by GC 76104.6 and 76104.7,$ 2 Penal Code 1465.8 requires imposition of an additional fee of twenty dollars ($20) for court security on every conviction for a criminal offense, including a traffic offense, except parking offenses as defined in Penal Code 1463,$20 A person involved in a car accident who was not using a seatbelt may be liable for damages far greater than if they had been using a seatbelt. However, when in court, most states protect motorists from having their damages reduced in a lawsuit due to the nonuse of a seatbelt, even if they were acting in violation of the law by not wearing the seatbelt. Currently, damages may be reduced for the nonuse of a seatbelt in 16 states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida (See F.S.A. 316.614(10)), Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.[10] Seat belt laws are effective in reducing car crash deaths.[11] One study found that mandatory-seatbelt laws reduced traffic fatalities by 8% and serious traffic-related injuries by 9%, respectively.[12] Primary-seatbelt laws seem to be more effective at reducing crash deaths than secondary laws.[13][14]

John David Sweeney, Jr.🚨In the United States, a Social Security number (SSN) is a nine-digit number issued to U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and temporary (working) residents under section 205(c)(2) of the Social Security Act, codified as 42 U.S.C.??405(c)(2). The number is issued to an individual by the Social Security Administration, an independent agency of the United States government. Although its primary purpose is to track individuals for Social Security purposes,[1] the Social Security number has become a de facto national identification number for taxation and other purposes.[2] A Social Security number may be obtained by applying on Form SS-5, application for A Social Security Number Card.[3] Social Security numbers were first issued by the Social Security Administration in November 1935 as part of the New Deal Social Security program. Within three months, 25 million numbers were issued.[4] On November 24, 1936, 1,074 of the nation's 45,000 post offices were designated "typing centers" to type up Social Security cards that were then sent to Washington, D.C. On December 1, 1936, as part of the publicity campaign for the new program, Joseph L. Fay of the Social Security Administration selected a record from the top of the first stack of 1,000 records and announced that the first Social Security number in history was assigned to John David Sweeney, Jr., of New Rochelle, New York.[5][6] Before 1986, people often did not obtain a Social Security number until the age of about 14,[7] since the numbers were used for income tracking purposes, and those under that age seldom had substantial income.[8] The Tax Reform Act of 1986 required parents to list Social Security numbers for each dependent over the age of 5 for whom the parent wanted to claim a tax deduction.[9] Before this act, parents claiming tax deductions were simply trusted not to lie about the number of children they supported. During the first year of the Tax Reform Act, this anti-fraud change resulted in seven million fewer minor dependents being claimed. The disappearance of these dependents is believed to have involved either children who never existed or tax deductions improperly claimed by non-custodial parents.[10] In 1988, the threshold was lowered to 2 years old, and in 1990, the threshold was lowered yet again to 1 year old.[11] Today, an SSN is required regardless of the child's age to receive an exemption.[citation needed] Since then, parents have often applied for Social Security numbers for their children soon after birth; today, it can be done on the application for a birth certificate.[12] The original purpose of this number was to track individuals' accounts within the Social Security program. It has since come to be used as an identifier for individuals within the United States, although rare errors occur where duplicates do exist. As numbers are now assigned by the central issuing office of the SSA, it is unlikely that duplication will ever occur again. A few duplications did occur when prenumbered cards were sent out to regional SSA offices and (originally) Post Offices. Employee, patient, student, and credit records are sometimes indexed by Social Security number. The U.S. Armed Forces has used the Social Security number as an identification number for Army and Air Force personnel since July 1, 1969, the Navy and Marine Corps for their personnel since January 1, 1972, and the Coast Guard for their personnel since October 1, 1974.[13] Previously, the United States military used a much more complicated system of service numbers that varied by service. Beginning in June 2011, DOD began removing the Social Security number from military identification cards. It is replaced by a unique DOD identification number, formerly known as the EDIPI.[14] Social Security was originally a universal tax, but when Medicare was passed in 1965, objecting religious groups in existence prior to 1951 were allowed to opt out of the system.[15] Because of this, not every American is part of the Social Security program, and not everyone has a number. However, a social security number is required for parents to claim their children as dependents for federal income tax purposes,[12] and the Internal Revenue Service requires all corporations to obtain SSNs (or alternative identifying numbers) from their employees, as described below. The Old Order Amish have fought to prevent universal Social Security by overturning rules such as a requirement to provide a Social Security number for a hunting license.[16] Social Security cards printed from January 1946 until January 1972 expressly stated that people should not use the number and card for identification.[17] Since nearly everyone in the United States now has an SSN, it became convenient to use it anyway and the message was removed.[18] Since then, Social Security numbers have become de facto national identification numbers.[2] Although some people do not have an SSN assigned to them, it is becoming increasingly difficult to engage in legitimate financial activities such as applying for a loan or a bank account without one.[19] While the government cannot require an individual to disclose their SSN without a legal basis, companies may refuse to provide service to an individual who does not provide an SSN.[20][21] The card on which an SSN is issued is still not suitable for primary identification as it has no photograph, no physical description and no birth date. All it does is confirm that a particular number has been issued to a particular name. Instead, a driver's license or state ID card is used as an identification for adults. Internal Revenue Code section 6109(d) provides: "The social security account number issued to an individual for purposes of section 205(c)(2)(A) of the Social Security Act [codified as 42 U.S.C.??405(c)(2)(A)] shall, except as shall otherwise be specified under regulations of the Secretary [of the Treasury or his delegate], be used as the identifying number for such individual for purposes of this title [the Internal Revenue Code, title 26 of the United States Code]."[22] The Internal Revenue Code also provides, when required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary [of the Treasury or his delegate]: According to U.S. Treasury regulations, any person who, after October 31, 1962, works as an employee for wages subject to Social Security taxes, Medicare taxes, or U.S. federal income tax withholdings is required to apply for "an account number" using "Form SS-5."[24] A taxpayer who is not eligible to have a Social Security number must obtain an alternative Taxpayer Identification Number. Three different types of Social Security cards are issued. The most common type contains the cardholder's name and number. Such cards are issued to U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents. There are also two restricted types of Social Security cards: In 2004 Congress passed The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act; parts of which mandated that the Social Security Administration redesign the Social Security Number (SSN) Card to prevent forgery. From April 2006 through August 2007, Social Security Administration (SSA) and Government Printing Office (GPO) employees were assigned to redesign the Social Security Number Card to the specifications of the Interagency Task Force created by the Commissioner of Social Security in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security. The new SSN card design utilizes both covert and overt security features created by the SSA and GPO design teams. Many citizens and privacy advocates are concerned about the disclosure and processing of Social Security numbers. Furthermore, researchers at Carnegie Mellon University have demonstrated an algorithm that uses publicly available personal information to reconstruct a given SSN.[25] The SSN is frequently used by those involved in identity theft, since it is interconnected with many other forms of identification, and because people asking for it treat it as an authenticator. Financial institutions generally require an SSN to set up bank accounts, credit cards, and loanspartly because they assume that no one except the person it was issued to knows it. Exacerbating the problem of using the Social Security number as an identifier is the fact that the Social Security card contains no biometric identifiers of any sort, making it essentially impossible to tell whether a person using a certain SSN truly belongs to someone without relying on other documentation (which may itself have been falsely procured through use of the fraudulent SSN). Congress has proposed federal laws that restrict the use of SSNs for identification and bans their use for a number of commercial purposese.g., rental applications.[26] The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) offers alternatives to SSNs in some places where providing untrusted parties with identification numbers is essential. Tax return preparers must obtain and use a Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN) to include on their client's tax returns (as part of signature requirements). Day care services have tax benefits, and even a sole proprietor should give parents an EIN (employer identification number) to use on their tax return. The Social Security Administration has suggested that, if asked to provide his or her Social Security number, a citizen should ask which law requires its use.[27] In accordance with 7213 of the 9/11 Commission Implementation Act of 2004 and 20 C.F.R. 422.103(e)(2), the number of replacement Social Security cards per person is generally limited to three per calendar year and ten in a lifetime.[27] Identity confusion has also occurred because of the use of local Social Security numbers by the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau, whose numbers overlap with those of residents of New Hampshire and Maine.[28] A person can request a new Social Security number, but only under certain conditions;[29] For all of these conditions, credible third-party evidence such as a restraining order or police report, is required. The Social Security number is a nine-digit number in the format "AAA-GG-SSSS".[31] The number is divided into three parts: the first three digits, known as the area number because they were formerly assigned by geographical region; the middle two digits, known as the group number; and the final four digits, known as the serial number. On June 25, 2011, the SSA changed the SSN assignment process to "SSN randomization".[32] SSN randomization affected the SSN assignment process in the following ways: Because Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) are issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), they were not affected by this SSA change. Prior to the 2011 randomization process, the first three digits or area number were assigned by geographical region. Prior to 1973, cards were issued in local Social Security offices around the country and the area number represented the office code where the card was issued. This did not necessarily have to be in the area where the applicant lived, since a person could apply for their card in any Social Security office. Beginning in 1973, when the SSA began assigning SSNs and issuing cards centrally from Baltimore, the area number was assigned based on the ZIP Code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card. The applicant's mailing address did not have to be the same as their place of residence. Thus, the area number did not necessarily represent the state of residence of the applicant regardless of whether the card was issued prior to, or after, 1973. Generally, numbers were assigned beginning in the northeast and moving south and westward, so that people applying from addresses on the east coast had the lowest numbers and those on the west coast had the highest numbers. As the areas assigned to a locality were exhausted, new areas from the pool were assigned, so some states had noncontiguous groups of numbers. The middle two digits or group number range from 01 to 99. Even before SSN randomization, the group numbers were not assigned consecutively within an area. Instead, for administrative reasons, group numbers were issued in the following order:[33] As an example, group number 98 would be issued before 11. The last four digits are serial numbers. Before SSN randomization took effect, they represented a straight numerical sequence of digits from 0001 to 9999 within the group. Prior to June 25, 2011, a valid SSN could not have an area number between 734 and 749, or above 772, the highest area number the Social Security Administration had allocated. Effective June 25, 2011, the SSA assigns SSNs randomly and allows for the assignment of area numbers between 734 and 749 and above 772 through the 800s.[34] This should not be confused with Tax Identification Numbers (TINs), which include additional area numbers.[35] Some special numbers are never allocated: Until 2011, the SSA published the last group number used for each area number.[38] Since group numbers were allocated in a regular pattern, it was possible to identify an unissued SSN that contained an invalid group number. Now numbers are assigned randomly, and fraudulent SSNs are not easily detectable with publicly available information. Many online services, however, provide SSN validation. Unlike many similar numbers, no check digit is included. The Social Security Administration does not reuse Social Security numbers. It has issued over 450 million since the start of the program, and at a use rate of about 5.5 million per year. It says it has enough to last several generations without reuse or changing the number of digits.[39] However, there have been instances where multiple individuals have been inadvertently assigned the same Social Security number.[40] Some SSNs used in advertising have rendered those numbers invalid. One famous instance of this occurred in 1938 when the E. H. Ferree Company in Lockport, New York, decided to promote its product by showing how a Social Security card would fit into its wallets. A sample card, used for display purposes, was placed in each wallet, which was sold by Woolworth and other department stores across the country; the wallet manufacturer's vice president and treasurer Douglas Patterson used the actual SSN of his secretary, Hilda Schrader Whitcher. Even though the card was printed in red (the real card is printed in blue) and had "Specimen" printed across the front, many people used Whitcher's SSN as their own. The Social Security Administration's account of the incident also claims that the fake card was half the size of a real card, despite a miniature card's being useless for its purpose and despite Whitcher's holding two cards of apparently identical size in the accompanying photograph. Over time, the number that appeared (078-05-1120) has been claimed by a total of over 40,000 people as their own.[41] The SSA initiated an advertising campaign stating that it was incorrect to use the number (Hilda Whitcher was issued a new SSN). However, the number was found to be in use by 12 individuals as late as 1977.[41] More recently, Todd Davis distributed his SSN in advertisements for his company's LifeLock identity theft protection service, which allowed his identity to be stolen over a dozen times.[42][43] List showing the geographical location of the first three digits of the social security numbers assigned in the United States and its territories since 1973. Repeated numbers indicate that they've been transferred to another location or they're shared by more than one location. The above table is only valid for SSN issued before June 2011. On June 25, 2011, the SSA changed the SSN assignment process to "SSN randomization".[45] SSN randomization affects the SSN assignment process. Among its changes, it eliminates the geographical significance of the first three digits of the SSN, previously referred to as the Area Number, by no longer allocating the Area Numbers for assignment to individuals in specific states. The table above is based on out-of-date information. Numbers in the range of 650-699 most certainly have been issued (see related comment on the Talk page).

any motion of a body where gravity is the only force acting upon it🚨In Newtonian physics, free fall is any motion of a body where gravity is the only force acting upon it. In the context of general relativity, where gravitation is reduced to a space-time curvature, a body in free fall has no force acting on it. An object in the technical sense of the term "free fall" may not necessarily be falling down in the usual sense of the term. An object moving upwards would not normally be considered to be falling, but if it is subject to the force of gravity only, it is said to be in free fall. The moon is thus in free fall. In a uniform gravitational field, in the absence of any other forces, gravitation acts on each part of the body equally and this is weightlessness, a condition that also occurs when the gravitational field is zero (such as when far away from any gravitating body). The term "free fall" is often used more loosely than in the strict sense defined above. Thus, falling through an atmosphere without a deployed parachute, or lifting device, is also often referred to as free fall. The aerodynamic drag forces in such situations prevent them from producing full weightlessness, and thus a skydiver's "free fall" after reaching terminal velocity produces the sensation of the body's weight being supported on a cushion of air. In the Western world prior to the 16th century, it was generally assumed that the speed of a falling body would be proportional to its weightthat is, a 10?kg object was expected to fall ten times faster than an otherwise identical 1?kg object through the same medium. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle (384ÿ322 BC) discussed falling objects in Physics (Book VII) which was perhaps the first book on mechanics (see Aristotelian physics). The Italian scientist Galileo Galilei (1564ÿ1642) subjected the Aristotelian theories to experimentation and careful observation. He then combined the results of these experiments with mathematical analysis in an unprecedented way. According to a tale that may be apocryphal, in 1589ÿ92 Galileo dropped two objects of unequal mass from the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Given the speed at which such a fall would occur, it is doubtful that Galileo could have extracted much information from this experiment. Most of his observations of falling bodies were really of bodies rolling down ramps. This slowed things down enough to the point where he was able to measure the time intervals with water clocks and his own pulse (stopwatches having not yet been invented). This he repeated "a full hundred times" until he had achieved "an accuracy such that the deviation between two observations never exceeded one-tenth of a pulse beat." In 1589ÿ92, Galileo wrote De Motu Antiquiora, an unpublished manuscript on the motion of falling bodies. Examples of objects in free fall include: Technically, an object is in free fall even when moving upwards or instantaneously at rest at the top of its motion. If gravity is the only influence acting, then the acceleration is always downward and has the same magnitude for all bodies, commonly denoted g {\displaystyle g} . Since all objects fall at the same rate in the absence of other forces, objects and people will experience weightlessness in these situations. Examples of objects not in free fall: The example of a falling skydiver who has not yet deployed a parachute is not considered free fall from a physics perspective, since he experiences a drag force that equals his weight once he has achieved terminal velocity (see below). However, the term "free fall skydiving" is commonly used to describe this case in everyday speech, and in the skydiving community. It is not clear, though, whether the more recent sport of wingsuit flying fits under the definition of free fall skydiving. Near the surface of the Earth, an object in free fall in a vacuum will accelerate at approximately 9.8?m/s2, independent of its mass. With air resistance acting on an object that has been dropped, the object will eventually reach a terminal velocity, which is around 53?m/s (195?km/h or 122?mph[1]) for a human skydiver. The terminal velocity depends on many factors including mass, drag coefficient, and relative surface area and will only be achieved if the fall is from sufficient altitude. A typical skydiver in a spread-eagle position will reach terminal velocity after about 12 seconds, during which time he will have fallen around 450?m (1,500?ft).[1] Free fall was demonstrated on the moon by astronaut David Scott on August 2, 1971. He simultaneously released a hammer and a feather from the same height above the moon's surface. The hammer and the feather both fell at the same rate and hit the ground at the same time. This demonstrated Galileo's discovery that, in the absence of air resistance, all objects experience the same acceleration due to gravity. (On the Moon, the gravitational acceleration is much less than on Earth, approximately 1.6?m/s2.) This is the "textbook" case of the vertical motion of an object falling a small distance close to the surface of a planet. It is a good approximation in air as long as the force of gravity on the object is much greater than the force of air resistance, or equivalently the object's velocity is always much less than the terminal velocity (see below). where This case, which applies to skydivers, parachutists or any body of mass, m {\displaystyle m} , and cross-sectional area, A {\displaystyle A} , with Reynolds number well above the critical Reynolds number, so that the air resistance is proportional to the square of the fall velocity, v {\displaystyle v} , has an equation of motion where {\displaystyle \rho } is the air density and C D {\displaystyle C_{\mathrm {D} }} is the drag coefficient, assumed to be constant although in general it will depend on the Reynolds number. Assuming an object falling from rest and no change in air density with altitude, the solution is: where the terminal speed is given by The object's speed versus time can be integrated over time to find the vertical position as a function of time: Using the figure of 56?m/s for the terminal velocity of a human, one finds that after 10 seconds he will have fallen 348 metres and attained 94% of terminal velocity, and after 12 seconds he will have fallen 455 metres and will have attained 97% of terminal velocity. However, when the air density cannot be assumed to be constant, such as for objects or skydivers falling from high altitude, the equation of motion becomes much more difficult to solve analytically and a numerical simulation of the motion is usually necessary. The figure shows the forces acting on meteoroids falling through the Earth's upper atmosphere. HALO jumps, including Joe Kittinger's and Felix Baumgartner's record jumps (see below), and the planned Le Grand Saut, also belong in this category.[2] It can be said that two objects in space orbiting each other in the absence of other forces are in free fall around each other, e.g. that the Moon or an artificial satellite "falls around" the Earth, or a planet "falls around" the Sun. Assuming spherical objects means that the equation of motion is governed by Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation, with solutions to the gravitational two-body problem being elliptic orbits obeying Kepler's laws of planetary motion. This connection between falling objects close to the Earth and orbiting objects is best illustrated by the thought experiment, Newton's cannonball. The motion of two objects moving radially towards each other with no angular momentum can be considered a special case of an elliptical orbit of eccentricity e = 1 (radial elliptic trajectory). This allows one to compute the free-fall time for two point objects on a radial path. The solution of this equation of motion yields time as a function of separation: where Substituting y = 0 we get the free-fall time. The separation as a function of time is given by the inverse of the equation. The inverse is represented exactly by the analytic power series: Evaluating this yields:[3][4] where x = [ 3 2 ( 2 ? t 2 y 0 3 ) ] 2 / 3 {\displaystyle x=\left[{\frac {3}{2}}\left({\frac {\pi }{2}}-t{\sqrt {\frac {2\mu }{{y_{0}}^{3}}}}\right)\right]^{2/3}} In general relativity, an object in free fall is subject to no force and is an inertial body moving along a geodesic. Far away from any sources of space-time curvature, where spacetime is flat, the Newtonian theory of free fall agrees with general relativity but otherwise the two disagree.[how?] The experimental observation that all objects in free fall accelerate at the same rate, as noted by Galileo and then embodied in Newton's theory as the equality of gravitational and inertial masses, and later confirmed to high accuracy by modern forms of the E?tv?s experiment, is the basis of the equivalence principle, from which basis Einstein's theory of general relativity initially took off. In 1914, while doing demonstrations for the U.S. Army, a parachute pioneer named Tiny Broadwick deployed her chute manually, thus becoming the first person to jump free-fall. According to the Guinness Book of Records, Eugene Andreev (USSR) holds the official FAI record for the longest free-fall parachute jump after falling for 24,500 metres (80,400?ft) from an altitude of 25,458 metres (83,524?ft) near the city of Saratov, Russia on November 1, 1962. Although later on jumpers would ascend higher altitudes, Andreev's record was set without the use of a drogue chute during the jump and therefore remains the longest genuine free fall record.[5] During the late 1950s, Captain Joseph Kittinger of the United States was assigned to the Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories at Wright-Patterson AFB in Dayton, Ohio. For Project Excelsior (meaning "ever upward", a name given to the project by Colonel John Stapp), as part of research into high altitude bailout, he made a series of three parachute jumps wearing a pressurized suit, from a helium balloon with an open gondola. The first, from 76,400 feet (23,290?m) in November 1959 was a near tragedy when an equipment malfunction caused him to lose consciousness, but the automatic parachute saved him (he went into a flat spin at a rotational velocity of 120 rpm; the g-force at his extremities was calculated to be over 22 times that of gravity, setting another record). Three weeks later he jumped again from 74,700 feet (22,770?m). For that return jump Kittinger was awarded the A. Leo Stevens parachute medal. On August 16, 1960 he made the final jump from the Excelsior III at 102,800 feet (31,330?m). Towing a small drogue chute for stabilization, he fell for 4 minutes and 36 seconds reaching a maximum speed of 614?mph (988?km/h)[6] before opening his parachute at 14,000 feet (4,270?m). Pressurization for his right glove malfunctioned during the ascent, and his right hand swelled to twice its normal size.[7] He set records for highest balloon ascent, highest parachute jump, longest drogue-fall (4 min), and fastest speed by a human through the atmosphere.[8] The jumps were made in a "rocking-chair" position, descending on his back, rather than the usual arch familiar to skydivers, because he was wearing a 60-pound (27?kg) "kit" on his behind and his pressure suit naturally formed that shape when inflated, a shape appropriate for sitting in an airplane cockpit. For the series of jumps, Kittinger was decorated with an oak leaf cluster to his Distinguished Flying Cross and awarded the Harmon Trophy by President Dwight Eisenhower. In 2012, the Red Bull Stratos mission took place. On October 14, 2012, Felix Baumgartner broke the records previously set by Kittinger for the highest free fall, the highest manned helium balloon flight, and the fastest free fall; he jumped from 128,100 feet (39,045?m), reaching 833.9 mph (1342 km/h) - Mach 1.24. Kittinger was a member of the mission control and helped design the capsule and suit that Baumgartner ascended and jumped in. On October 24, 2014, Alan Eustace broke the record previously set by Baumgartner for the highest free fall. He jumped from a height of 135,908 feet (41,425?m).[9] A falling person at low altitude will reach terminal velocity after about 12 seconds, falling some 450?m (1,500?ft) in that time. The person will then maintain this speed without falling any faster.[10] Terminal velocity at higher altitudes is greater due to the thinner atmosphere and consequent lower air resistance; free-fallers from high altitudes, including Kittinger, Baumgartner and Eustace discussed in this article, fell faster at higher altitudes. The severity of injury increases with the height of a free fall, but also depends on body and surface features and the manner that the body impacts on to the surface.[11] The chance of surviving increases if landing on a soft surface, such as snow.[11] Overall, the height at which 50% of children die from a fall is between four and five storey heights above the ground.[12] JAT stewardess Vesna Vulovi? survived a fall of 10,000 metres (33,000?ft)[13] on January 26, 1972 when she was aboard JAT Flight 367. The plane was brought down by explosives over Srbsk Kamenice in the former Czechoslovakia (now the Czech Republic). The Serbian stewardess suffered a broken skull, three broken vertebrae (one crushed completely), and was in a coma for 27 days. In an interview, she commented that, according to the man who found her, "I was in the middle part of the plane. I was found with my head down and my colleague on top of me. One part of my body with my leg was in the plane and my head was out of the plane. A catering trolley was pinned against my spine and kept me in the plane. The man who found me, says I was very lucky. He was in the German Army as a medic during World War Two. He knew how to treat me at the site of the accident."[14] In World War II there were several reports of military aircrew surviving long falls from severely damaged aircraft: Flight Sergeant Nicholas Alkemade jumped at 18,000 feet (5,500?m) without a parachute and survived as he hit pine trees and soft snow. He suffered a sprained leg. Staff Sergeant Alan Magee exited his aircraft at 22,000 feet (6,700?m) without a parachute and survived as he landed on the glass roof of a train station. Lieutenant Ivan Chisov bailed out at 23,000 feet (7,000?m). While he had a parachute his plan was to delay opening it as he had been in the midst of an air-battle and was concerned about getting shot while hanging below the parachute. He lost consciousness due to lack of oxygen and hit a snow-covered slope while still unconscious. While he suffered severe injuries he was able to fly again in three months. It was reported that two of the victims of the Lockerbie bombing survived for a brief period after hitting the ground (with the forward nose section fuselage in freefall mode), but died from their injuries before help arrived.[15] Juliane Koepcke survived a long free fall resulting from the December 24, 1971, crash of LANSA Flight 508 (a LANSA Lockheed Electra OB-R-941 commercial airliner) in the Peruvian rainforest. The airplane was struck by lightning during a severe thunderstorm and exploded in mid air, disintegrating two miles (3.2?km) up. K?pcke, who was 17 years old at the time, fell to earth still strapped into her seat. The German Peruvian teenager survived the fall with only a broken collarbone, a gash to her right arm, and her right eye swollen shut.[16] As an example of "freefall survival" that was not as extreme as sometimes reported in the press, a skydiver from Staffordshire was said to have plunged 6,000?metres without a parachute in Russia and survived. James Boole said that he was supposed to have been given a signal by another skydiver to open his parachute, but it came two seconds too late. Boole, who was filming the other skydiver for a television documentary, landed on snow-covered rocks and suffered a broken back and rib.[17] While he was lucky to survive, this was not a case of true freefall survival, because he was flying a wingsuit, greatly decreasing his vertical speed. This was over descending terrain with deep snow cover, and he impacted while his parachute was beginning to deploy. Over the years, other skydivers have survived accidents where the press has reported that no parachute was open, yet they were actually being slowed by a small area of tangled parachute. They might still be very lucky to survive, but an impact at 80?mph (129?km/h) is much less severe than the 120?mph (193?km/h) that might occur in normal freefall.[original research?] Parachute jumper and stuntman Luke Aikins successfully jumped without a parachute from about 25,000 feet (7,600?m) into a 10,000-square-foot (930?m2) net in California, US, on 30 July 2016.[18]

between 300 and 900 metres🚨The Strait of Gibraltar (Arabic: ???? ??? ??????, Spanish: Estrecho de Gibraltar) is a narrow strait that connects the Atlantic Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea and separates Gibraltar and Peninsular Spain in Europe from Morocco and Ceuta (Spain) in Africa. The name comes from the Rock of Gibraltar, which in turn originates from the Arabic Jebel Tariq (meaning "Tariq's mountain"[1]) named after Tariq ibn Ziyad. It is also known as the Straits of Gibraltar, the Gut of Gibraltar (although this is mostly archaic),[2] the STROG (Strait Of Gibraltar) in naval use,[3] and Bab Al Maghrib (Arabic: ??? ????????), "Gate of the West". In the Middle Ages, Muslims called it Al-Zuqaq, "The Passage", the Romans called it Fretum Gatitanum (Strait of Cadiz),[4] and in the ancient world it was known as the "Pillars of Hercules" (Ancient Greek: ϫ? ?? ?ϫ).[5] Europe and Africa are separated by 7.7 nautical miles (14.3?km; 8.9?mi) of ocean at the strait's narrowest point. The Strait's depth ranges between 300 and 900 metres (160 and 490 fathoms; 980 and 2,950?ft)[6] which possibly interacted with the lower mean sea level of the last major glaciation 20,000 years ago[7] when the level of the sea is believed to have been lower by 110ÿ120?m (60ÿ66 fathoms; 360ÿ390?ft).[8] Ferries cross between the two continents every day in as little as 35 minutes. The Spanish side of the Strait is protected under El Estrecho Natural Park. On the northern side of the Strait are Spain and Gibraltar (a British overseas territory in the Iberian Peninsula), while on the southern side are Morocco and Ceuta (a Spanish exclave in Morocco). Its boundaries were known in antiquity as the Pillars of Hercules. There are several islets, such as the disputed Isla Perejil, that are claimed by both Morocco and Spain.[9] Due to its location, the Strait is commonly used for illegal immigration from Africa to Europe.[10] The International Hydrographic Organization defines the limits of the Strait of Gibraltar as follows:[11] The seabed of the Strait is composed of synorogenic Betic-Rif clayey flysch covered by Pliocene and/or Quaternary calcareous sediments, sourced from thriving cold water coral communities.[12] Exposed bedrock surfaces, coarse sediments and local sand dunes attest to the strong bottom current conditions at the present time. Around 5.9 million years ago,[13] the connection between the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean along the Betic and Rifan Corridor was progressively restricted until its total closure, effectively causing the salinity of the Mediterranean to rise periodically within the gypsum and salt deposition range, during what is known as the Messinian salinity crisis. In this water chemistry environment, dissolved mineral concentrations, temperature and stilled water currents combined and occurred regularly to precipitate many mineral salts in layers on the seabed. The resultant accumulation of various huge salt and mineral deposits about the Mediterranean basin are directly linked to this era. It is believed that this process took a short time, by geological standards, lasting between 500,000 and 600,000 years. It is estimated that, were the straits closed even at today's higher sea level, most water in the Mediterranean basin would evaporate within only a thousand years, as it is believed to have done then,[13] and such an event would lay down mineral deposits like the salt deposits now found under the sea floor all over the Mediterranean. After a lengthy period of restricted intermittent or no water exchange between the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean basin, approximately 5.33 million years ago,[14] the Atlantic-Mediterranean connection was completely reestablished through the Strait of Gibraltar by the Zanclean flood, and has remained open ever since.[15] The erosion produced by the incoming waters seems to be the main cause for the present depth of the strait (900 m at the narrows, 280 m at the Camarinal Sill). The strait is expected to close again as the African Plate moves northward relative to the Eurasian Plate,[citation needed] but on geological rather than human timescales. The Strait has been identified as an Important Bird Area by BirdLife International because hundreds of thousands of seabirds use it every year to pass between the Mediterranean and the Atlantic, including large numbers of Cory's and Balearic shearwaters, Audouin's, yellow-legged and lesser black-backed gulls, razorbills and Atlantic puffins.[16] Evidence of the first human habitation of the area by Neanderthals dates back to 125,000 years ago. It is believed that the Rock of Gibraltar may have been one of the last outposts of Neanderthal habitation in the world, with evidence of their presence there dating to as recently as 24,000 years ago.[17] Archaeological evidence of Homo sapiens habitation of the area dates back c. 40,000 years. The relatively short distance between the two shores has served as a quick crossing point for various groups and civilizations throughout history, including Carthaginians campaigning against Rome, Romans travelling between the provinces of Hispania and Mauritania, Vandals raiding south from Germania through Western Rome and into North Africa in the 5th century, Moors and Berbers in the 8thÿ11th centuries, and Spain and Portugal in the 16th century. Beginning in 1492, the straits began to play a certain cultural role in acting as a barrier against cross-strait conquest and the flow of culture and language that would naturally follow such a conquest. In that year, the last Muslim government north of the straits was overthrown by a Spanish force. Since that time, the straits have come to foster the development of two very distinct and varied cultures on either side of the straits after sharing much the same culture and greater degrees of tolerance for over 300+ years from the 8th century to the early 13th century.[citation needed] On the northern side, Christian-European culture has remained dominant since the expulsion of the last Muslim kingdom in 1492, along with the Romance Spanish language, while on the southern side, Muslim-Arabic/Mediterranean has been dominant since the spread of Islam into North Africa in the 700s, along with the Arabic language. For the last 500 years, religious and cultural intolerance, more than the small travel barrier that the straits present, has come to act as a powerful enforcing agent of the cultural separation that exists between these two groups.[citation needed] The small British enclave of the city of Gibraltar presents a third cultural group found in the straits. This enclave was first established in 1704 and has since been used by Britain to act as a surety for control of the sea lanes into and out of the Mediterranean. Following the Spanish coup of July 1936 the Spanish Republican Navy tried to blockade the Strait of Gibraltar to hamper the transport of Army of Africa troops from Spanish Morocco to Peninsular Spain. On 5 August 1936 the so-called Convoy de la victoria was able to bring at least 2,500 men across the strait, breaking the republican blockade.[18] The Strait is an important shipping route from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic. There are ferries that operate between Spain and Morocco across the strait, as well as between Spain and Ceuta and Gibraltar to Tangier. In December 2003, Spain and Morocco agreed to explore the construction of an undersea rail tunnel to connect their rail systems across the Strait. The gauge of the rail would be 1,435?mm (4?ft 8.5?in) to match the proposed construction and conversion of significant parts of the existing broad gauge system to standard gauge.[19] While the project remains in a planning phase, Spanish and Moroccan officials have met to discuss it as recently as 2012,[20] and proposals predict it could be completed by 2025. The Strait of Gibraltar links the Atlantic Ocean directly to the Mediterranean Sea. This direct linkage creates certain unique flow and wave patterns. These unique patterns are created due to the interaction of various regional and global evaporative forces, tidal forces, and wind forces. Through the strait, water generally flows more or less continually in both an eastward and a westward direction. A smaller amount of deeper saltier and therefore denser waters continually work their way westwards (the Mediterranean outflow), while a larger amount of surface waters with lower salinity and density continually work their way eastwards (the Mediterranean inflow). These general flow tendencies may be occasionally interrupted for brief periods to accommodate temporary tidal flow requirements, depending on various lunar and solar alignments. Still, on the whole and over time, the balance of the water flow is eastwards, due to an evaporation rate within the Mediterranean basin higher than the combined inflow of all the rivers that empty into it.[citation needed] The shallow Camarinal Sill of the Strait of Gibraltar, which forms the shallowest point within the strait, acts to limit mixing between the cold, less saline Atlantic water and the warm Mediterranean waters. The Camarinal Sill is located at the far western end of the strait. The Mediterranean waters are so much saltier than the Atlantic waters that they sink below the constantly incoming water and form a highly saline (thermohaline, both warm and salty) layer of bottom water. This layer of bottom-water constantly works its way out into the Atlantic as the Mediterranean outflow. On the Atlantic side of the strait, a density boundary separates the Mediterranean outflow waters from the rest at about 100?m (330?ft) depth. These waters flow out and down the continental slope, losing salinity, until they begin to mix and equilibrate more rapidly, much further out at a depth of about 1,000?m (3,300?ft). The Mediterranean outflow water layer can be traced for thousands of kilometres west of the strait, before completely losing its identity. During the Second World War, German U-boats used the currents to pass into the Mediterranean Sea without detection, by maintaining silence with engines off.[21] From September 1941 to May 1944 Germany managed to send 62 U-boats into the Mediterranean. All these boats had to navigate the British-controlled Strait of Gibraltar where nine U-boats were sunk while attempting passage and 10 more had to break off their run due to damage. No U-boats ever made it back into the Atlantic and all were either sunk in battle or scuttled by their own crews.[22] Internal waves (waves at the density boundary layer) are often produced by the strait. Like traffic merging on a highway, the water flow is constricted in both directions because it must pass over the Camarinal Sill. When large tidal flows enter the Strait and the high tide relaxes, internal waves are generated at the Camarinal Sill and proceed eastwards. Even though the waves may occur down to great depths, occasionally the waves are almost imperceptible at the surface, at other times they can be seen clearly in satellite imagery. These internal waves continue to flow eastward and to refract around coastal features. They can sometimes be traced for as much as 100?km (62?mi), and sometimes create interference patterns with refracted waves.[23] The Strait lies mostly within the territorial waters of Spain and Morocco, except for at the far eastern end. The United Kingdom (through Gibraltar) claims 3 nautical miles around Gibraltar putting part of the Strait inside British territorial waters, and the smaller-than-maximal claim also means that part of the Strait therefore lies in international waters according to the British claim. However, the ownership of Gibraltar and its territorial waters is disputed by Spain, meanwhile Morocco dispute the far extern end (of Ceuta). Some studies have proposed the possibility of erecting tidal power generating stations within the strait, to be powered from the predictable current at the strait. In the 1920s and 1930s, the Atlantropa project proposed damming the strait to generate large amounts of electricity and lower the sea level of the Mediterranean by several hundreds of meters to create large new lands for settlement.[24] This proposal would however have devastating effects on the local climate and ecology and would dramatically change the strength of the West African Monsoon. Randall Munroe's Time, the 1190th comic on xkcd, is a story about a group of people living in the Mediterranean in 13000 CE, after the Strait of Gibraltar has closed. The people must find a new home because the straits are opening up again in a repeat of the Zanclean flood. Coordinates: 355818N 52909W? / ?35.97167N 5.48583W? / 35.97167; -5.48583

Hugo Mnsterberg🚨Eyewitness testimony is the account a bystander or victim gives in the courtroom, describing what that person observed that occurred during the specific incident under investigation. Ideally this recollection of events is detailed; however, this is not always the case. This recollection is used as evidence to show what happened from a witness' point of view. Memory recall has been considered a credible source in the past, but has recently come under attack as forensics can now support psychologists in their claim that memories and individual perceptions can be unreliable, manipulated, and biased. Due to this, many countries and states within the US are now attempting to make changes in how eyewitness testimony is presented in court. Eyewitness testimony is a specialized focus within cognitive psychology. Psychologists have probed the reliability of eyewitness testimony since the beginning of the 20th century.[1] One prominent pioneer was Hugo Mnsterberg, whose controversial book On the Witness Stand (1908) demonstrated the fallibility of eyewitness accounts, but met with fierce criticism, particularly in legal circles.[2] His ideas did, however, gain popularity with the public.[3] Decades later, DNA testing would clear individuals convicted on the basis of errant eyewitness testimony. Studies by Scheck, Neufel, and Dwyer showed that many DNA-based exonerations involved eyewitness evidence.[4] In the 1970s and '80s, Bob Buckhout showed inter alia that eyewitness conditions can, at least within ethical and other constraints, be simulated on university campuses,[2] and that large numbers of people can be mistaken: "Nearly 2,000 witnesses can be wrong" was the title of one paper.[5] The mechanisms by which flaws enter eyewitness testimony are varied and can be quite subtle. One way is a person's memory being influenced by things seen or heard after the crime occurred. This distortion is known as the post-event misinformation effect (Loftus and Palmer, 1974). After a crime occurs and an eyewitness comes forward, law enforcement tries to gather as much information as they can to avoid the influence that may come from the environment, such as the media. Many times when the crime is surrounded by much publicity, an eyewitness may experience source misattribution. Source misattribution occurs when a witness is incorrect about where or when they have the memory from. If a witness cannot correctly identify the source of their retrieved memory, the witness is seen as not reliable. While some witnesses see the entirety of a crime happen in front of them, some witness only part of a crime. These witnesses are more likely to experience confirmation bias. Witness expectations are to blame for the distortion that may come from confirmation bias. For example, Lindholm and Christianson (1998) found that witnesses of a mock crime who did not witness the whole crime, nevertheless testified to what they expected would have happened. These expectations are normally similar across individuals due to the details of the environment. Evaluating the credibility of eye-witness testimony falls on all individual jurors when such evidence is offered as testimony in a trial in the United States.[6] Research has shown that mock juries are often unable to distinguish between a false and accurate eyewitness testimony. "Jurors" often appear to correlate the confidence level of the witness with the accuracy of their testimony. An overview of this research by Laub and Bornstein shows this to be an inaccurate gauge of accuracy.[7] Research on eyewitness testimony looks at systematic variables or estimator variables. Estimator variables are characteristics of the witness, event, testimony, or testimony evaluators. Systematic variables are variables that are, or have the possibility of, being controlled by the criminal justice system. Both sets of variables can be manipulated and studied during research, but only system variables can be controlled in actual procedure.[1] Among children, suggestibility can be very high. Suggestibility is the term used when a witness accepts information after the actual event and incorporates it into the memory of the event itself. Children's developmental level (generally correlated with age) causes them to be more easily influenced by leading questions, misinformation, and other post-event details. Compared to older children, preschool-age children are more likely to fall victim to suggestions without the ability to focus solely on the facts of what happened.[8] In addition, a recent meta-analysis found that older adults (over age 65) tend to be more susceptible to memory distortion brought about by misleading post-event information, compared to young adults.[9] Many of the early studies of memory demonstrated how memories can fail to be accurate records of experiences. Because jurors and judges do not have access to the original event, it is important to know whether a testimony is based on actual experience or not.[10] In a 1932 study, Frederic Bartlett demonstrated how serial reproduction of a story distorted accuracy in recalling information. He told participants a complicated Native American story and had them repeat it over a series of intervals. With each repetition, the stories were altered. Even when participants recalled accurate information, they filled in gaps with information that would fit their personal experiences. His work showed long term memory to be adaptable.[11] Bartlett viewed schemas as a major cause of this occurrence. People attempt to place past events into existing representations of the world, making the memory more coherent. Instead of remembering precise details about commonplace occurrences, a schema is developed. A schema is a generalization formed mentally based on experience.[12] The common use of these schemas suggests that memory is not an identical reproduction of experience, but a combination of actual events with already existing schemas. Bartlett summarized this issue, explaining [M]emory is personal, not because of some intangible and hypothetical persisting self , which receives and maintains innumerable traces, restimulating them whenever it needs; but because the mechanism of adult human memory demands an organisation of schemata depending upon an interplay of appetites, instincts, interests and ideas peculiar to any given subject. Thus if, as in some pathological cases, these active sources of the schemata get cut off from one another, the peculiar personal attributes of what is remembered fail to appear.[13] Further research of schemas shows memories that are inconsistent with a schema decay faster than those that match up with a schema. Tuckey and Brewer found pieces of information that were inconsistent with a typical robbery decayed much faster than those that were schema consistent over a 12-week period, unless the information stood out as being extremely unusual. The use of schemas has been shown to increase the accuracy of recall of schema-consistent information but this comes at the cost of decreased recall of schema-inconsistent information.[14] Elizabeth Loftus is one of the leading psychologists in the field of eyewitness testimony. She provided extensive research on this topic, revolutionizing the field with her bold stance that challenges the credibility of eyewitness testimony in court. She suggests that memory is not reliable and goes to great lengths to provide support for her arguments. She mainly focuses on the integration of misinformation with the original memory, forming a new memory. Some of her most convincing experiments support this claim: As early as 1900, psychologists like Alfred Binet recorded how the phrasing of questioning during an investigation could alter witness response. Binet believed people were highly susceptible to suggestion, and called for a better approach to questioning witnesses.[19] Studies conducted by Crombag (1996) discovered that in an incident involving a crew attempting to return to the airport but were unable to maintain flight and crashed into an 11 story apartment building. Though no cameras caught the moment of impact on film, many news stations covered the tragedy with footage taken after impact.[20] Ten months after the event, the researchers interviewed people about the crash. According to theories about flashbulb memory, the intense shock of the event should have made the memory of the event incredibly accurate. This same logic is often applied to those who witness a criminal act. To test this assumption, participants were asked questions that planted false information about the event. Fifty-five percent of subjects reported having watched the moment of impact on television, and recalled the moment the plane broke out in flames-even though it was impossible for them to have seen either of these occurrences. One researcher remarked, "[V]ery critical sense would have made our subjects realize that the implanted information could not possibly be true. We are still at a loss as to why so few of them realized this." A survey of research on the matter confirm eyewitness testimony consistently changes over time and based on the type of questioning.[21] The approach investigators and lawyers take in their questioning has repeatedly shown to alter eyewitness response. One study showed changing certain words and phrases resulted in an increase in overall estimations of witnesses.[22] Law enforcement, legal professions, and psychologists have worked together in attempts to make eyewitness testimony more reliable and accurate. Geiselman, Fisher, MacKinnon, and Holland saw much improvement in eyewitness memory with an interview procedure they referred to as the cognitive interview. The approach focuses on making witness aware of all events surrounding a crime without generating false memories or inventing details. In this tactic, the interviewer builds a rapport with the witness before asking any questions.[23] They then allow the witness to provide an open ended account of the situation. The interviewer then asks follow up questions to clarify the witness' account, reminding the witness it is acceptable to be unsure and move on.[1] This approach guides the witness over a rigid protocol. When implemented correctly, the CI showed more accuracy and efficiency without additional incorrect information being generated.[24] Currently, this is the U.S. Department of Justice's suggested method for law enforcement officials to use in obtaining information from witnesses.[25] Programs training officers in this method have been developed outside the U.S. in many European countries, as well as Australia, New Zealand, and Israel.[26] While some analysis of police interviewing technique reveals this change towards CI interviewing is not put into effect by many officials in the U.S.A. and the U.K., it is still considered to be the most effective means of decreasing error in eyewitness testimony.[1][27] Experts debate what changes need to occur in the legal process in response to research on inaccuracy of eyewitness testimony. It has been suggested that the jury be given a checklist to evaluate eyewitness testimony when given in court. R. J. Shafer offers this checklist for evaluating eyewitness testimony: In 2011, the New Jersey Supreme Court created new rules for the admissibility of eyewitness testimony in court. The new rules require judges to explain to jurors any influences that may heighten the risk for error in the testimony. The rules are part of nationwide court reform that attempts to improve the validity of eyewitness testimony and lower the rate of false conviction.[29]

farming🚨Paleolithic Epipaleolithic Mesolithic Neolithic The Neolithic (/?ni???l?IJ?k/?(?listen),[1], also known as the "New Stone Age"), the final division of the Stone Age, began about 12,000 years ago when the first development of farming appeared in the Epipalaeolithic Near East, and later in other parts of the world. The division lasted until the transitional period of the Chalcolithic from about 6,500 years ago (4500 BC), marked by the development of metallurgy, leading up to the Bronze Age and Iron Age. In Northern Europe, the Neolithic lasted until about 1700 BC, while in China it extended until 1200 BC. Other parts of the world (the New World) remained in the Neolithic stage of development until European contact.[citation needed] The Neolithic comprises a progression of behavioral and cultural characteristics and changes, including the use of wild and domestic crops and of domesticated animals.[a] The term Neolithic derives from the Greek ?? nos, "new" and ?IJ? lthos, "stone", literally meaning "New Stone Age". The term was coined by Sir John Lubbock in 1865 as a refinement of the three-age system.[2] Following the ASPRO chronology, the Neolithic arises at 10,200 BC in the Levant, arising from the Natufian culture, where pioneering use of wild cereals evolved into early farming. The Natufian period The Natufian period or "proto-Neolithic" lasted from 12,500 to 9,500?BC, and taken to overlap with the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPNA) of 10,200ÿ8800?BC. As the Natufians had become dependent on wild cereals in their diet, and a sedentary way of life had begun among them, the climatic changes associated with the Younger Dryas (about 10,000 BC) are thought to have forced people to develop farming. By 10,200ÿ8800?BC farming communities had arisen in the Levant and spread to Asia Minor, North Africa and North Mesopotamia. Mesopotamia is the site of the earliest developments of the Neolithic Revolution from around 10,000?BC. Early Neolithic farming was limited to a narrow range of plants, both wild and domesticated, which included einkorn wheat, millet and spelt, and to the keeping of dogs, sheep and goats. By about 6900ÿ6400?BC, it included domesticated cattle and pigs, the establishment of permanently or seasonally inhabited settlements, and the use of pottery.[b] Not all of these cultural elements characteristic of the Neolithic appeared everywhere in the same order: the earliest farming societies in the Near East did not use pottery. In other parts of the world, such as Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia, independent domestication events led to their own regionally distinctive Neolithic cultures that arose completely independently of those in Europe and Southwest Asia. Early Japanese societies and other East Asian cultures used pottery before developing agriculture.[4][5] In the Middle East, cultures identified as Neolithic began appearing in the 10th millennium BC.[6] Early development occurred in the Levant (e.g., Pre-Pottery Neolithic A and Pre-Pottery Neolithic B) and from there spread eastwards and westwards. Neolithic cultures are also attested in southeastern Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia by around 8000?BC.[citation needed] The prehistoric Beifudi site near Yixian in Hebei Province, China, contains relics of a culture contemporaneous with the Cishan and Xinglongwa cultures of about 6000ÿ5000?BC, neolithic cultures east of the Taihang Mountains, filling in an archaeological gap between the two Northern Chinese cultures. The total excavated area is more than 1,200 square yards (1,000?m2; 0.10?ha), and the collection of neolithic findings at the site encompasses two phases.[7] The Neolithic 1 (PPNA) period began roughly around 10,000?BC in the Levant.[6] A temple area in southeastern Turkey at G?bekli Tepe dated around 9500?BC may be regarded as the beginning of the period. This site was developed by nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes, evidenced by the lack of permanent housing in the vicinity and may be the oldest known human-made place of worship.[8] At least seven stone circles, covering 25 acres (10?ha), contain limestone pillars carved with animals, insects, and birds. Stone tools were used by perhaps as many as hundreds of people to create the pillars, which might have supported roofs. Other early PPNA sites dating to around 9500ÿ9000?BC have been found in Jericho, West Bank (notably Ain Mallaha, Nahal Oren, and Kfar HaHoresh), Gilgal in the Jordan Valley, and Byblos, Lebanon. The start of Neolithic 1 overlaps the Tahunian and Heavy Neolithic periods to some degree.[citation needed] The major advance of Neolithic 1 was true farming. In the proto-Neolithic Natufian cultures, wild cereals were harvested, and perhaps early seed selection and re-seeding occurred. The grain was ground into flour. Emmer wheat was domesticated, and animals were herded and domesticated (animal husbandry and selective breeding).[citation needed] In 2006, remains of figs were discovered in a house in Jericho dated to 9400?BC. The figs are of a mutant variety that cannot be pollinated by insects, and therefore the trees can only reproduce from cuttings. This evidence suggests that figs were the first cultivated crop and mark the invention of the technology of farming. This occurred centuries before the first cultivation of grains.[9] Settlements became more permanent with circular houses, much like those of the Natufians, with single rooms. However, these houses were for the first time made of mudbrick. The settlement had a surrounding stone wall and perhaps a stone tower (as in Jericho). The wall served as protection from nearby groups, as protection from floods, or to keep animals penned. Some of the enclosures also suggest grain and meat storage.[citation needed] The Neolithic 2 (PPNB) began around 8800?BC according to the ASPRO chronology in the Levant (Jericho, Palestine).[6] As with the PPNA dates, there are two versions from the same laboratories noted above. This system of terminology, however, is not convenient for southeast Anatolia and settlements of the middle Anatolia basin.[citation needed] A settlement of 3,000 inhabitants was found in the outskirts of Amman, Jordan. Considered to be one of the largest prehistoric settlements in the Near East, called 'Ain Ghazal, it was continuously inhabited from approximately 7250?BC to approximately 5000?BC.[10] Settlements have rectangular mud-brick houses where the family lived together in single or multiple rooms. Burial findings suggest an ancestor cult where people preserved skulls of the dead, which were plastered with mud to make facial features. The rest of the corpse could have been left outside the settlement to decay until only the bones were left, then the bones were buried inside the settlement underneath the floor or between houses.[citation needed] The Neolithic 3 (PN) began around 6,400 BC in the Fertile Crescent.[6] By then distinctive cultures emerged, with pottery like the Halafian (Turkey, Syria, Northern Mesopotamia) and Ubaid (Southern Mesopotamia). This period has been further divided into PNA (Pottery Neolithic A) and PNB (Pottery Neolithic B) at some sites.[11] The Chalcolithic (Stone-Bronze) period began about 4500?BC, then the Bronze Age began about 3500?BC, replacing the Neolithic cultures.[citation needed] Around 10,000 BC the first fully developed Neolithic cultures belonging to the phase Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) appeared in the Fertile Crescent.[6] Around 10,700ÿ9400?BC a settlement was established in Tell Qaramel, 10 miles (16?km) north of Aleppo. The settlement included two temples dating to 9650?BC.[12] Around 9000?BC during the PPNA, one of the world's first towns, Jericho, appeared in the Levant. It was surrounded by a stone wall and contained a population of 2,000ÿ3,000 people and a massive stone tower.[13] Around 6400?BC the Halaf culture appeared in Lebanon, Israel and Palestine, Syria, Anatolia, and Northern Mesopotamia and subsisted on dryland agriculture. In 1981 a team of researchers from the Maison de l'Orient et de la Mditerrane, including Jacques Cauvin and Oliver Aurenche divided Near East neolithic chronology into ten periods (0 to 9) based on social, economic and cultural characteristics.[14] In 2002 Danielle Stordeur and Frdric Abbs advanced this system with a division into five periods. They also advanced the idea of a transitional stage between the PPNA and PPNB between 8800 and 8600?BC at sites like Jerf el Ahmar and Tell Aswad.[16] Alluvial plains (Sumer/Elam). Little rainfall makes irrigation systems necessary. Ubaid culture from 6,900 BC.[citation needed] Domestication of sheep and goats reached Egypt from the Near East possibly as early as 6000?BC.[17][18][19] Graeme Barker states "The first indisputable evidence for domestic plants and animals in the Nile valley is not until the early fifth millennium BC in northern Egypt and a thousand years later further south, in both cases as part of strategies that still relied heavily on fishing, hunting, and the gathering of wild plants" and suggests that these subsistence changes were not due to farmers migrating from the Near East but was an indigenous development, with cereals either indigenous or obtained through exchange.[20] Other scholars argue that the primary stimulus for agriculture and domesticated animals (as well as mud-brick architecture and other Neolithic cultural features) in Egypt was from the Middle East.[21][22][23] In southeast Europe agrarian societies first appeared in the 7th millennium BC, attested by one of the earliest farming sites of Europe, discovered in Vasht?mi, southeastern Albania and dating back to 6500?BC.[24][25] In Northwest Europe it is much later, typically lasting just under 3,000 years from c. 4500 BCÿ1700 BC. Anthropomorphic figurines have been found in the Balkans from 6000?BC,[26] and in Central Europe by around 5800?BC (La Hoguette). Among the earliest cultural complexes of this area are the Sesklo culture in Thessaly, which later expanded in the Balkans giving rise to Star?evo-K?r?s (Cris), Linearbandkeramik, and Vin?a. Through a combination of cultural diffusion and migration of peoples, the Neolithic traditions spread west and northwards to reach northwestern Europe by around 4500 BC. The Vin?a culture may have created the earliest system of writing, the Vin?a signs, though archaeologist Shan Winn believes they most likely represented pictograms and ideograms rather than a truly developed form of writing.[27] The Cucuteni-Trypillian culture built enormous settlements in Romania, Moldova and Ukraine from 5300 to 2300?BC. The megalithic temple complexes of ?gantija on the Mediterranean island of Gozo (in the Maltese archipelago) and of Mnajdra (Malta) are notable for their gigantic Neolithic structures, the oldest of which date back to around 3600?BC. The Hypogeum of ?al-Saflieni, Paola, Malta, is a subterranean structure excavated around 2500?BC; originally a sanctuary, it became a necropolis, the only prehistoric underground temple in the world, and showing a degree of artistry in stone sculpture unique in prehistory to the Maltese islands. After 2500?BC, the Maltese Islands were depopulated for several decades until the arrival of a new influx of Bronze Age immigrants, a culture that cremated its dead and introduced smaller megalithic structures called dolmens to Malta.[28] In most cases there are small chambers here, with the cover made of a large slab placed on upright stones. They are claimed to belong to a population certainly different from that which built the previous megalithic temples. It is presumed the population arrived from Sicily because of the similarity of Maltese dolmens to some small constructions found in the largest island of the Mediterranean sea.[29] The earliest Neolithic sites in South Asia are Bhirrana in Haryana dated to 7570-6200 BC,[30] and Mehrgarh, dated to between 6500 and 5500 BC, in the Kachi plain of Baluchistan, Pakistan; the site has evidence of farming (wheat and barley) and herding (cattle, sheep and goats). In South India, the Neolithic began by 6500?BC and lasted until around 1400?BC when the Megalithic transition period began. South Indian Neolithic is characterized by Ashmounds since 2500?BC in Karnataka region, expanded later to Tamil Nadu.[citation needed] In East Asia, the earliest sites include Nanzhuangtou culture around 9500ÿ9000?BC,[31] Pengtoushan culture around 7500ÿ6100?BC, and Peiligang culture around 7000ÿ5000?BC. The 'Neolithic' (defined in this paragraph as using polished stone implements) remains a living tradition in small and extremely remote and inaccessible pockets of West Papua (Indonesian New Guinea). Polished stone adze and axes are used in the present day (as of 2008[update]) in areas where the availability of metal implements is limited. This is likely to cease altogether in the next few years as the older generation die off and steel blades and chainsaws prevail. In 2012, news was released about a new farming site discovered in Munam-ri, Goseong, Gangwon Province, South Korea, which may be the earliest farmland known to date in east Asia.[32] "No remains of an agricultural field from the Neolithic period have been found in any East Asian country before, the institute said, adding that the discovery reveals that the history of agricultural cultivation at least began during the period on the Korean Peninsula".[33] The farm was dated between 3600 and 3000?BC. Pottery, stone projectile points, and possible houses were also found. "In 2002, researchers discovered prehistoric earthenware, jade earrings, among other items in the area". The research team will perform accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) dating to retrieve a more precise date for the site. In Mesoamerica, a similar set of events (i.e., crop domestication and sedentary lifestyles) occurred by around 4500 BC, but possibly as early as 11,000ÿ10,000 BC. These cultures are usually not referred to as belonging to the Neolithic; in America different terms are used such as Formative stage instead of mid-late Neolithic, Archaic Era instead of Early Neolithic and Paleo-Indian for the preceding period.[34] The Formative stage is equivalent to the Neolithic Revolution period in Europe, Asia, and Africa. In the southwestern United States it occurred from 500 to 1200 AD when there was a dramatic increase in population and development of large villages supported by agriculture based on dryland farming of maize, and later, beans, squash, and domesticated turkeys. During this period the bow and arrow and ceramic pottery were also introduced.[35] Australia, in contrast to New Guinea, has generally been held not to have had a Neolithic period, with a hunter-gatherer lifestyle continuing until the arrival of Europeans. This view can be challenged[clarification needed][weasel?words] in terms of the definition of agriculture, but "Neolithic" remains a rarely-used and not very useful concept in discussing Australian prehistory.[36] During most of the Neolithic age of Eurasia, people lived in small tribes composed of multiple bands or lineages.[37] There is little scientific evidence of developed social stratification in most Neolithic societies; social stratification is more associated with the later Bronze Age.[38] Although some late Eurasian Neolithic societies formed complex stratified chiefdoms or even states, generally states evolved in Eurasia only with the rise of metallurgy, and most Neolithic societies on the whole were relatively simple and egalitarian.[37] Beyond Eurasia, however, states were formed during the local Neolithic in three areas, namely in the Preceramic Andes with the Norte Chico Civilization,[39][40] Formative Mesoamerica and Ancient Hawai?i.[41] However, most Neolithic societies were noticeably more hierarchical than the Upper Paleolithic cultures that preceded them and hunter-gatherer cultures in general.[42][43] The domestication of large animals (c. 8000?BC) resulted in a dramatic increase in social inequality in most of the areas where it occurred; New Guinea being a notable exception.[44] Possession of livestock allowed competition between households and resulted in inherited inequalities of wealth. Neolithic pastoralists who controlled large herds gradually acquired more livestock, and this made economic inequalities more pronounced.[45] However, evidence of social inequality is still disputed, as settlements such as Catal Huyuk reveal a striking lack of difference in the size of homes and burial sites, suggesting a more egalitarian society with no evidence of the concept of capital, although some homes do appear slightly larger or more elaborately decorated than others. Families and households were still largely independent economically, and the household was probably the center of life.[46][47] However, excavations in Central Europe have revealed that early Neolithic Linear Ceramic cultures ("Linearbandkeramik") were building large arrangements of circular ditches between 4800 and 4600?BC. These structures (and their later counterparts such as causewayed enclosures, burial mounds, and henge) required considerable time and labour to construct, which suggests that some influential individuals were able to organise and direct human labour though non-hierarchical and voluntary work remain possibilities. There is a large body of evidence for fortified settlements at Linearbandkeramik sites along the Rhine, as at least some villages were fortified for some time with a palisade and an outer ditch.[48][49] Settlements with palisades and weapon-traumatized bones, such as those found at the Talheim Death Pit, have been discovered and demonstrate that "...systematic violence between groups" and warfare was probably much more common during the Neolithic than in the preceding Paleolithic period.[43] This supplanted an earlier view of the Linear Pottery Culture as living a "peaceful, unfortified lifestyle".[50] Control of labour and inter-group conflict is characteristic of tribal groups with social rank that are headed by a charismatic individual either a 'big man' or a proto-chief functioning as a lineage-group head. Whether a non-hierarchical system of organization existed is debatable, and there is no evidence that explicitly suggests that Neolithic societies functioned under any dominating class or individual, as was the case in the chiefdoms of the European Early Bronze Age.[51] Theories to explain the apparent implied egalitarianism of Neolithic (and Paleolithic) societies have arisen, notably the Marxist concept of primitive communism. The shelter of the early people changed dramatically from the Upper Paleolithic to the Neolithic era. In the Paleolithic, people did not normally live in permanent constructions. In the Neolithic, mud brick houses started appearing that were coated with plaster.[52] The growth of agriculture made permanent houses possible. Doorways were made on the roof, with ladders positioned both on the inside and outside of the houses.[52] The roof was supported by beams from the inside. The rough ground was covered by platforms, mats, and skins on which residents slept.[53] Stilt-houses settlements were common in the Alpine and Pianura Padana (Terramare) region.[54] Remains have been found at the Ljubljana Marshes in Slovenia and at the Mondsee and Attersee lakes in Upper Austria, for example. A significant and far-reaching shift in human subsistence and lifestyle was to be brought about in areas where crop farming and cultivation were first developed: the previous reliance on an essentially nomadic hunter-gatherer subsistence technique or pastoral transhumance was at first supplemented, and then increasingly replaced by, a reliance upon the foods produced from cultivated lands. These developments are also believed to have greatly encouraged the growth of settlements, since it may be supposed that the increased need to spend more time and labor in tending crop fields required more localized dwellings. This trend would continue into the Bronze Age, eventually giving rise to permanently settled farming towns, and later cities and states whose larger populations could be sustained by the increased productivity from cultivated lands. The profound differences in human interactions and subsistence methods associated with the onset of early agricultural practices in the Neolithic have been called the Neolithic Revolution, a term coined in the 1920s by the Australian archaeologist Vere Gordon Childe. One potential benefit of the development and increasing sophistication of farming technology was the possibility of producing surplus crop yields, in other words, food supplies in excess of the immediate needs of the community. Surpluses could be stored for later use, or possibly traded for other necessities or luxuries. Agricultural life afforded securities that nomadic life could not, and sedentary farming populations grew faster than nomadic. However, early farmers were also adversely affected in times of famine, such as may be caused by drought or pests. In instances where agriculture had become the predominant way of life, the sensitivity to these shortages could be particularly acute, affecting agrarian populations to an extent that otherwise may not have been routinely experienced by prior hunter-gatherer communities.[45] Nevertheless, agrarian communities generally proved successful, and their growth and the expansion of territory under cultivation continued. Another significant change undergone by many of these newly agrarian communities was one of diet. Pre-agrarian diets varied by region, season, available local plant and animal resources and degree of pastoralism and hunting. Post-agrarian diet was restricted to a limited package of successfully cultivated cereal grains, plants and to a variable extent domesticated animals and animal products. Supplementation of diet by hunting and gathering was to variable degrees precluded by the increase in population above the carrying capacity of the land and a high sedentary local population concentration. In some cultures, there would have been a significant shift toward increased starch and plant protein. The relative nutritional benefits and drawbacks of these dietary changes and their overall impact on early societal development is still debated. In addition, increased population density, decreased population mobility, increased continuous proximity to domesticated animals, and continuous occupation of comparatively population-dense sites would have altered sanitation needs and patterns of disease. The identifying characteristic of Neolithic technology is the use of polished or ground stone tools, in contrast to the flaked stone tools used during the Paleolithic era. Neolithic people were skilled farmers, manufacturing a range of tools necessary for the tending, harvesting and processing of crops (such as sickle blades and grinding stones) and food production (e.g. pottery, bone implements). They were also skilled manufacturers of a range of other types of stone tools and ornaments, including projectile points, beads, and statuettes. But what allowed forest clearance on a large scale was the polished stone axe above all other tools. Together with the adze, fashioning wood for shelter, structures and canoes for example, this enabled them to exploit their newly won farmland. Neolithic peoples in the Levant, Anatolia, Syria, northern Mesopotamia and Central Asia were also accomplished builders, utilizing mud-brick to construct houses and villages. At ?atalh?yk, houses were plastered and painted with elaborate scenes of humans and animals. In Europe, long houses built from wattle and daub were constructed. Elaborate tombs were built for the dead. These tombs are particularly numerous in Ireland, where there are many thousand still in existence. Neolithic people in the British Isles built long barrows and chamber tombs for their dead and causewayed camps, henges, flint mines and cursus monuments. It was also important to figure out ways of preserving food for future months, such as fashioning relatively airtight containers, and using substances like salt as preservatives. The peoples of the Americas and the Pacific mostly retained the Neolithic level of tool technology until the time of European contact. Exceptions include copper hatchets and spearheads in the Great Lakes region. Most clothing appears to have been made of animal skins, as indicated by finds of large numbers of bone and antler pins that are ideal for fastening leather. Wool cloth and linen might have become available during the later Neolithic,[55][56] as suggested by finds of perforated stones that (depending on size) may have served as spindle whorls or loom weights.[57][58][59] The clothing worn in the Neolithic Age might be similar to that worn by ?tzi the Iceman, although he was not Neolithic (since he belonged to the later Copper age). farming, animal husbandry pottery, metallurgy, wheel circular ditches, henges, megaliths Neolithic religion Neolithic human settlements include: The world's oldest known engineered roadway, the Sweet Track in England, dates from 3800?BC and the world's oldest freestanding structure is the neolithic temple of ?gantija in Gozo, Malta. Note: Dates are very approximate, and are only given for a rough estimate; consult each culture for specific time periods. Early Neolithic Periodization: The Levant: 9500ÿ8000?BC; Europe: 5000ÿ4000?BC; Elsewhere: varies greatly, depending on region. Middle Neolithic Periodization: The Levant: 8000ÿ6000?BC; Europe: 4000ÿ3500?BC; Elsewhere: varies greatly, depending on region. Later Neolithic Periodization: 6500ÿ4500?BC; Europe: 3500ÿ3000?BC; Elsewhere: varies greatly, depending on region. Periodization: Near East: 4500ÿ3300?BC; Europe: 3000ÿ1700?BC; Elsewhere: varies greatly, depending on region. In the Americas, the Eneolithic ended as late as the 19th century AD for some peoples.

more than 40 million downloads🚨Marvel Contest of Champions is a 2014 mobile fighting game[1] developed and published by Kabam. It was released on December 10, 2014 for iOS and Android.[2] The fighting game is primarily set in the Marvel Universe.[3] The game is loosely based on the events of the limited series Contest of Champions.[4] Players assume the role of a Summoner, tasked by The Collector to build a team of Marvel heroes and villains and pit them against one another in combat. Gameplay is similar to that of Injustice: Gods Among Us and Mortal Kombat X, where the game's fighting arena is rendered in 3D with a 2D plane for the superheroes' movements and actions. New players begin with access to two characters, and can work to access additional characters including Iron Man, Spider-Man, Wolverine, Hulk, Magneto, Ultron, Loki, and Rhino. Each character is upgradable, featuring their own classes, movements, traits, abilities, and special moves. Gameplay features an energy system that limits the number of quest-based battles in which players can compete. Energy recharges automatically at a set rate over time or players can refill their energy manually. The energy limit is increased when players increase their level. Game items (such as crystals) that impact play may be found in chests as players win battles. In addition to quests, users can battle opponents in the game's "Versus" mode, pitting their champions against those of another player in one-on-one matches or three-on-three limited-time arenas. However, the opponents are A.I.-controlled so it is not an actual real-time player battle. Controversially, Marvel Contest of Champions requires a persistent Internet connection for both single and multiplayer modes.[5][better?source?needed] Controls are designed for touch, rather than adapting buttons or virtual joysticks. Gameplay includes quick, normal, and heavy attack options, as well as block and dodge. The character can shuffle back or sprint forward, and each hero has three of their own special attacks (unlocked with ranks and stars), as well as unique abilities and a signature ability. Synergy Bonuses reward the player for combining characters who have a unique relationship. For example, combining Black Bolt and Cyclops rewards the entire team with a +10% block proficiency. As stated by Cuz Parry from Kabam, "There is also a combo system that rewards players for mixing up their moves and performing well-timed blocks. The higher the combo, the faster your special attacks regenerate."[3] As characters take and deal damage, a power meter fills which indicates the potential for unique moves. When the player levels-up their characters, more-powerful special attacks are possible but can be used less frequently due to their higher power cost.[6] Characters can be leveled up by using ISO-8, Gold and Catalysts, which are all gained when fighting in Story Quests and special events. Class-specific ISO-8 and Catalysts provide heroes of the specified class a bonus. Completing quests provides XP (experience points) and unlocks the ability to add more heroes to the player's roster, to a maximum of five heroes. Higher levels also allow players to save more ISO-8, catalysts and objects.[7] In addition to taking part in a global chat feature, players can also join alliances. Alliances allow chat amongst other members and provide the opportunity to work together to earn alliance points, used to earn its own type of crystal. To tie-in with the release of Avengers: Age of Ultron, Marvel Contest of Champions was updated in late April 2015 to include Ultron-centric events and characters. To assist in the Ultron missions, all players received 2-star Black Widow, The Vision, and Hulkbuster characters. The new quest, called "Ultron's Assault", was a limited-time Story Quest; it contained many small quests, referred to as Event Quests or story events, and provided new rewards through play. Additional limited-time quests have been introduced over the lifetime of the game, each playable for a period before being removed to make way for another quest. These quests often coincide with the release of comics, movies and TV series, though there seems to be a routine at Kabam to release a new quest every month even if there isn't a specific project to promote. Alliances are the groups or parties of the game, which can include up to 30 players and be private or open. Alliances allow players to gain alliance crystals and to access alliance quests. These alliances can be created with 5,000 battle chips or 100 units. Alliances can also take part in Alliance Events, such as "Rank Up", "Duel Skirmish" or "Summoner Advancement", each granting player rewards. Members of an alliance can assist one another in quests, and alliance members are ranked in relation to each other. The alliance leader is able to choose which members become officers, who are able to remove players from their alliance. In "Alliance Wars", two alliances compete head-to-head. There are a number of different locations where the battles take place. These include: the Avengers' Tower, the Astral Plane (overseen by the Eye of Agamotto), the Sanctum Sanctorum, Asteroid M, the Asgard throne room, Asgard vault, Asgard power station, The Kyln, Hell's Kitchen, Knowhere, the Savage Land, a S.H.I.E.L.D. helicarrier hangar, Sokovia, Grandmaster's 'Galactorum', the Wakandan necropolis, and an Oscorp laboratory. With the two-year anniversary of the game (Version 11.1 ÿ 10th of December 2016), Kabam introduced titles that players can select.[8] The various titles are unlocked by fully completing quests or meeting other in-game achievements. Marvel Contest of Champions features many playable heroes and villains. Playable fighters can come in one of six tiers, signified by 1 through 6 stars. Not all characters are available in every tier, and while some can be obtained through various crystals, others can only be obtained via the Versus arenas or special promotion. Each character is assigned to one of six classes: Cosmic, Tech, Mutant, Skill, Science, and Mystic. In some quests, using a character of a particular class will unlock paths. There are also relationships between the classes, and each have an advantage over another (e.g., Cosmic has advantage over Tech, Tech has advantage over Mutant, etc.). Characters with a class advantage over their opponent gain a class bonus, boosting both their attack and defense at a certain percentage during the fight. Three-star heroes and four-star heroes gain a higher percentage of damage compared to two-star heroes. Some characters are non-playable, several of which were only available for a limited time in Event Quests. Playable characters: Non-playable characters: Kabam creative director Cuz Parry describes the game as a "one vs. one, arcade-style fighting game with multiplayer as well as role-playing game elements with a quest/story mode where you're pitted against a wide range of heroes and villains from the Marvel Universe".[citation needed] On April 28, 2015, Kabam and Longtu Games announced that Marvel Contest of Champions would be published in China in late 2015. Some elements of the game will be changed for the Chinese market.[9] The version was later shut down and all players were transferred to the international version. In June 2015, Marvel announced they would be publishing a comic book adaptation of the game that would take place in the main Marvel universe. The comic will introduce new heroes who will eventually appear in the game, such as White Fox, a heroine from South Korea, and Guillotine, a French heroine with a mystical sword. The Maestro will be featured as an antagonist.[10][needs update] Marvel Contest of Champions has received generally positive response. Upon release in December 2014, the game was named Editors' Choice on the App Store. As of 2015, It had more than 40 million downloads.[9][needs update]

Charlotte🚨The WWE Raw Women's Championship is a women's professional wrestling championship created and promoted by the American professional wrestling promotion WWE on the Raw brand. It is one of two women's championships for WWE's main roster, along with the SmackDown Women's Championship on the SmackDown brand. The current champion is Alexa Bliss, who is in her second reign. Introduced as the WWE Women's Championship on April 3, 2016 at WrestleMania 32, it replaced the Divas Championship and has a unique title history, separate from WWE's original Women's Championship and the Divas Championship. Charlotte Flair, then known simply as Charlotte, was the inaugural champion. As a result of the 2016 draft, the championship became exclusive to Raw with a subsequent rename and SmackDown created the SmackDown Women's Championship as a counterpart title. On April 3, 2016, WWE Hall of Famer Lita appeared during the WrestleMania 32 pre-show and, after recapping the history of women's professional wrestling in WWE, unveiled the brand-new championship and declared that WWE's women would no longer be referred to as WWE Divas, but as "WWE Superstars" just as their male counterparts are.[1] This came after the term "Diva" was scrutinized by some commentators, fans, and several past and present WWE female performers, including then-Divas Champion Charlotte, who were in favor of changing the championship to the Women's Championship.[2] It was also changed because some WWE female wrestlers felt it diminished their athletic abilities and relegated them to "eye candy".[3][4] Lita then announced that the winner of the Divas Championship triple threat match between Charlotte, Becky Lynch, and Sasha Banks later that night would become the first-ever WWE Women's Champion, subsequently retiring the Divas Championship.[5] Charlotte, the final Divas Champion, became the inaugural WWE Women's Champion when she defeated Sasha Banks and Becky Lynch.[6] Following the reintroduction of the brand extension, then champion Charlotte was drafted to the Raw brand on the July 19, 2016 premiere episode of SmackDown Live, making the championship exclusive to Raw. In response, SmackDown created the SmackDown Women's Championship on August 23, 2016. The WWE Women's Championship was subsequently renamed to reflect its exclusivity to Raw.[1] When the title was introduced, it shared its name with the original Women's Championship. However, the new title does not share the same title history as the original, which was unified with the Divas Championship in 2010, with the combined title inheriting the latter's lineage and history. WWE acknowledges the original championship as its predecessor,[1] and notes that the lineage of female champions dates back to The Fabulous Moolah's reign in 1956.[5] When the championship was unveiled, there was no brand division as that had ended in August 2011. From its inception until the reintroduction of the brand extension in July 2016, then-champion Charlotte defended the title on both Raw and SmackDown. The Raw Women's Championship belt is similar in appearance to the WWE Championship belt, with a few notable differences. The strap is smaller to fit the champion, and white, as opposed to black. The die-cut WWE logo in the center plate sits on a red background, as opposed to a black one. The small print below the logo reads "Women's Champion". Like the WWE Championship belt, the Raw Women's Championship belt features two side plates, both separated by gold divider bars, with the WWE logo on the globe as default plates, which are customized with the current champion's logos as a similarity of the name plate feature of other championship belts.[5] As of September 18, 2017, overall there have been 11 reigns between 4 champions. Charlotte Flair, then known simply as Charlotte, was the inaugural champion, and she holds multiple records with the championship: her first reign is the longest reign at 113 days and she has the longest combined reign at 242 days (WWE lists 114 and 246, respectively), she is the oldest champion when she won her fourth championship at the age of 30, and she is tied with Sasha Banks for the most reigns at four. Banks is the youngest champion when she first won the title at 24 years old, and her fourth reign is the shortest at 8 days (WWE recognizes it as 9 days). Alexa Bliss is the current champion in her second reign. She won the title by defeating Sasha Banks on Raw on August 28, 2017 in her contractual rematch. As of September 18, 2017.

7 December 1941🚨

August 24, 1814🚨The Burning of Washington was a British attack against Washington, D.C., the capital of the United States, during the War of 1812. On August 24, 1814, after defeating the Americans at the Battle of Bladensburg, a British force led by Major General Robert Ross occupied Washington and set fire to many public buildings, including the White House (known as the Presidential Mansion), and the Capitol, as well as other facilities of the U.S. government.[2] The attack was in part a retaliation for the recent American destruction of Port Dover in Upper Canada. It marks the only time in U.S. history that Washington, D.C. has been occupied by a foreign force. President James Madison, military officials, and his government fled the city in the wake of the British victory at the Battle of Bladensburg. They eventually found refuge for the night in Brookeville, a small town in Montgomery County, Maryland, which is known today as the "United States Capital for a Day." President Madison spent the night in the house of Caleb Bentley, a Quaker who lived and worked in Brookeville. Bentley's house, known today as the Madison House, still stands in Brookeville. Less than a day after the attack began, a sudden, very heavy thunderstormpossibly a hurricaneput out the fires. It also spun off a tornado that passed through the center of the capital, setting down on Constitution Avenue and lifting two cannons before dropping them several yards away, killing British troops and American civilians alike. Following the storm, the British returned to their ships, many of which were badly damaged. The occupation of Washington lasted only about 26 hours. After the "Storm that saved Washington", as it soon came to be called, the Americans were able to regain control of the city.[3] The British government, already at war with Napoleonic France, adopted a defensive strategy against the United States when the Americans declared war in 1812. Reinforcements were held back from Canada and reliance was instead made on local militias and native allies to bolster the British Army in Canada. However, after the defeat and exile of Napoleon Bonaparte in April 1814, Britain was able to use its now available troops and ships to prosecute its war with the United States. In addition to reinforcements sent to Canada, the Earl of Bathurst, Secretary of State for War and the Colonies, dispatched an army brigade and additional naval vessels to Bermuda, from where a blockade of the US coast and even the occupation of some coastal islands had been overseen throughout the war. It was decided to use these forces in raids along the Atlantic seaboard to draw American forces away from Canada.[4] The commanders were under strict orders, however, not to carry out operations far inland, or to attempt to hold territory. Early in 1814, Vice Admiral Sir Alexander Cochrane had been appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Royal Navy's North America and West Indies Station, controlling naval forces based at the new Bermuda dockyard and the Halifax Naval Yard which were used to blockade US Atlantic ports throughout the war. He planned to carry the war into the United States by attacks in Virginia and against New Orleans.[5] Rear Admiral George Cockburn had commanded the squadron in Chesapeake Bay since the previous year. On June 25 he wrote to Cochrane, stressing that the defenses there were weak, and he felt that several major cities were vulnerable to attack.[6] Cochrane suggested attacking Baltimore, Washington and Philadelphia. On July 17, Cockburn recommended Washington as the target, because of the comparative ease of attacking the national capital and "the greater political effect likely to result".[7] An added motive was retaliation for what Britain saw as the "wanton destruction of private property along the north shores of Lake Erie" by American forces under Col. John Campbell in May 1814, the most notable being the Raid on Port Dover.[8] On June 2, 1814, Sir George Prvost, Governor General of The Canadas, wrote to Cochrane at Admiralty House, in Bailey's Bay, Bermuda, calling for a retaliation against the American destruction of private property in violation of the laws of war. Prvost argued that, in consequence of the late disgraceful conduct of the American troops in the wanton destruction of private property on the north shores of Lake Erie, in order that if the war with the United States continues you may, should you judge it advisable, assist in inflicting that measure of retaliation which shall deter the enemy from a repetition of similar outrages.[8] On July 18, Cochrane ordered Cockburn that to "deter the enemy from a repetition of similar outrages....You are hereby required and directed to destroy and lay waste such towns and districts as you may find assailable".[9] Cochrane instructed, "You will spare merely the lives of the unarmed inhabitants of the United States". Ross and Cockburn surveyed the torching of the President's Mansion, during which time a great storm arose unexpectedly out of the southeast. They were confronted a number of times while on horseback by older women from around Washington City and elderly clergymen (Southern Presbyterian and Southern Baptist), with women and children who had been hiding in homes and churches. They requested protection from abuse and robbery by enlisted personnel from the British Expeditionary Forces whom they accused of having tried to ransack private homes and other buildings. Major-General Ross had two British soldiers put in chains for violation of his general order. Throughout the events of that day, a severe storm blew into the city, worsening on the night of August 24, 1814. President James Madison, members of his government, and the military fled the city in the wake of the British victory at the Battle of Bladensburg. They eventually found refuge for the night in Brookeville, a small town in Montgomery County, Maryland, which is known today as the United States Capital for a Day. President Madison spent the night in the house of Caleb Bentley, a Quaker who lived and worked in Brookeville. Bentley's house, known today as the Madison House, still stands in Brookeville.[10] The sappers and miners of the Corps of Royal Engineers under Captain Blanshard were employed in burning the principal buildings. Blanshard reported that it seemed that the American President was so sure that the attacking force would be made prisoners that a handsome entertainment had been prepared. Blanshard and his sappers enjoyed the feast.[11]:358 The Capitol was, according to some contemporary travelers, the only building in Washington "worthy to be noticed."[12] Thus, it was a prime target for the invaders, both for its aesthetic and symbolic value. After looting the building, the British found it difficult to set the structure on fire, owing to its sturdy stone construction. Soldiers eventually gathered furniture into a heap and ignited it with rocket powder, which successfully set the building ablaze. Among the casualties of the destruction of the Capitol was the Library of Congress, the entire 3,000 volume collection of which was destroyed.[13] Several surrounding buildings in Capitol Heights also caught fire. After the war, Thomas Jefferson sold his own personal library to the government in order to pay personal debts, re-establishing the Library of Congress. After burning the Capitol, the British turned northwest up Pennsylvania Avenue toward the White House. After US government officials and President Madison fled the city, the First Lady Dolley Madison received a letter from her husband, urging her to be prepared to leave Washington at a moment's notice.[14] Dolley organized the slaves and staff to save valuables from the British.[15] James Madison's personal slave, the fifteen-year-old boy Paul Jennings, was an eyewitness.[16] After later buying his freedom from the widow Dolley Madison, Jennings published his memoir in 1865, considered the first from the White House: It has often been stated in print, that when Mrs. Madison escaped from the White House, she cut out from the frame the large portrait of Washington (now in one of the parlors there), and carried it off. She had no time for doing it. It would have required a ladder to get it down. All she carried off was the silver in her reticule, as the British were thought to be but a few squares off, and were expected any moment.[17] Jennings said the people who saved the painting and removed the objects actually were: John Sus (Jean Pierre Sioussat) (a Frenchman, then door-keeper, and still living) and Magraw [McGraw], the President's gardener, took it down and sent it off on a wagon, with some large silver urns and such other valuables as could be hastily got hold of. When the British did arrive, they ate up the very dinner, and drank the wines, &c., that I had prepared for the President's party.[17][18][19] The soldiers burned the president's house, and fuel was added to the fires that night to ensure they would continue burning into the next day. In 2009, President Barack Obama held a ceremony at the White House to honor Jennings as a representative of his contributions to saving the Gilbert Stuart painting and other valuables. [According to recorded history of this event, the painting that was saved was a copy of the Gilbert Stuart painting, NOT the original][20] "A dozen descendants of Jennings came to Washington, to visit the White House. They looked at the painting their relative helped save."[21] In an interview with National Public Radio, Jennings' great-great-grandson Hugh Alexander said, "We were able to take a family portrait in front of the painting, which was for me one of the high points."[16] He confirmed that Jennings later purchased his freedom from the widowed Dolley Madison.[16] The day after the destruction of the White House, Rear Admiral Cockburn entered the building of the D.C. newspaper, the National Intelligencer, intending to burn it down. However, several women persuaded him not to because they were afraid the fire would spread to their neighboring houses. Cockburn wanted to destroy the newspaper because its reporters had written so negatively about him, branding him "The Ruffian." Instead, he ordered his troops to tear the building down brick by brick, and ordered all the "C" type destroyed "so that the rascals can have no further means of abusing my name."[22] The British sought out the United States Treasury in hopes of finding money or items of worth, but they found only old records.[23] They burned the United States Treasury and other public buildings. The United States Department of War building was also burned. However, the War and State Department files had been removed, so all books and records had been saved; the only records of the War Department lost were recommendations of appointments for the Army and letters received from seven years earlier.[24] The First U.S. Patent Office Building was saved by the efforts of William Thornton, the former Architect of the Capitol and then the Superintendent of Patents, who gained British cooperation to preserve it.[25][A] "When the smoke cleared from the dreadful attack, the Patent Office was the only Government building . . . left untouched" in Washington.[26] The Americans had already burned much of the historic Washington Navy Yard, founded by Thomas Jefferson, to prevent capture of stores and ammunition,[27] as well as the 44-gun frigate USS Columbia and the 18 gun USS Argus both new vessels nearing completion.[28] The Navy Yard's Latrobe Gate, Quarters A, and Quarters B were the only buildings to escape destruction.[29][30] Also spared were the Marine Barracks and Commandant's House, although several private properties were damaged or destroyed.[31] In the afternoon of August 25, General Ross sent two hundred men to secure a fort on Greenleaf's Point. The fort, later known as Fort McNair, had already been destroyed by the Americans, but 150 barrels of gunpowder remained. While the British were trying to destroy it by dropping the barrels into a well, the powder ignited. As many as thirty men were killed in the explosion, and many others were maimed.[32] Less than a day after the attack began, a sudden very heavy thunderstormpossibly a hurricaneput out the fires. It also spun off a tornado that passed through the center of the capital, setting down on Constitution Avenue[3] and lifting two cannons before dropping them several yards away and killing British troops and American civilians alike.[33] Following the storm, the British troops returned to their ships, many of which were badly damaged. There is some debate regarding the effect of this storm on the occupation. While some assert that the storm forced their retreat,[3] it seems likely from their destructive and arsonous actions before the storm, and their written orders from Cochrane to "destroy and lay waste",[34] that their intention was merely to raze the city, rather than occupy it for an extended period. Whatever the case, the British occupation of Washington lasted only about 26 hours. Despite this, the "Storm that saved Washington" as it became known, did the opposite according to some. The rains sizzled and cracked the already charred walls of the White House and ripped away at structures the British had no plans to destroy (such as the Patent Office). The storm may have exacerbated an already dire situation for Washington DC. An encounter was noted between Sir George Cockburn 10th Baronet and a female resident of Washington. "Dear God! Is this the weather to which you are accustomed to in this infernal country?" enquired the Admiral. "This is a special interposition of Providence to drive our enemies from our city, the woman allegedly called out to Cockburn. "Not so, Madam," Cockburn retorted. It is rather to aid your enemies in the destruction of your city", before riding off on horseback.[35] Yet, the British left right after the storm completely unopposed by any American military forces. The Royal Navy reported that it lost one man killed and six wounded in the attack, of whom the fatality and three of the wounded were from the Corps of Colonial Marines.[36] The destruction of the Capitol, including the Senate House and the House of Representatives, the Arsenal, Dockyard, Treasury, War Office, President's mansion, bridge over the Potomac, a frigate and a sloop together with all Materiel was estimated at S365,000.[11]:359 A separate British force captured Alexandria, on the south side of the Potomac River, while Ross's troops were leaving Washington. The mayor of Alexandria made a deal and the British refrained from burning the town.[37] President Madison returned to Washington by September 1, on which date he issued a proclamation calling on citizens to defend the District of Columbia.[38] Congress returned and assembled in special session on September 19. Due to the destruction of the Capitol and other public buildings, they initially met in the Post and Patent Office building.[39] In 2013, an episode of the Weather Channel documentary series "Weather That Changed History," entitled "The Thunderstorm That Saved D.C.," was devoted to these events. Most contemporary American observers, including newspapers representing anti-war Federalists, condemned the destruction of the public buildings as needless vandalism.[40] Many of the British public were shocked by the burning of the Capitol and other buildings at Washington; such actions were denounced by most leaders of continental Europe, where capital cities had been repeatedly occupied in the course of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars and always spared destruction (at least on the part of the occupiers - the famous burning of Moscow that occurred less than two years prior had been an act carried out by the defenders). According to The Annual Register, the burning had "brought a heavy censure on the British character," with some members of Parliament, including the anti-establishment MP Samuel Whitbread,[40] joining in the criticism. The majority of British opinion believed that the burnings were justified following the damage that United States forces had done with its incursions into Canada. In addition, they noted that the United States had been the aggressor, declaring war and initiating it.[41] Several commentators regarded the damages as just revenge for the American destruction of the Parliament buildings and other public buildings in York, the provincial capital of Upper Canada, early in 1813. Sir George Prvost wrote that "as a just retribution, the proud capital at Washington has experienced a similar fate."[42] The Reverend John Strachan, who as Rector of York had witnessed the American acts there, wrote to Thomas Jefferson that the damage to Washington "was a small retaliation after redress had been refused for burnings and depredations, not only of public but private property, committed by them in Canada."[43] When they ultimately returned to Bermuda, the British forces took two pairs of portraits of King George III and his wife, Queen Charlotte, which had been discovered in one of the public buildings. One pair currently hangs in the House of Assembly of the Parliament of Bermuda, and the other in the Cabinet Building, both in the city of Hamilton.[44] The thick sandstone walls of the White House and Capitol survived, although scarred with smoke and scorch marks. There was a strong movement in Congress to relocate the nation's capital with many northern Congressmen pushing for a city north of the MasonÿDixon line. Philadelphia was quick to volunteer as a temporary home as did Georgetown, where Mayor Thomas Corcoran offered Georgetown College as a temporary home for Congress. Ultimately, a bill to relocate the capital was defeated in Congress and Washington remained the seat of government. Fearful that there might be pressure to relocate the capital altogether, Washington businessmen financed the construction of the Old Brick Capitol, where Congress met while the Capitol was reconstructed from 1815 to 1819. Madison resided in The Octagon House for the remainder of his term. Reconstruction of the White House began in early 1815 and was finished in time for President James Monroe's inauguration in 1817.[45] As American settlement expanded westward, serious proposals to relocate the capital to a location in the interior that would not be vulnerable to seaborne attack continued to be made from time to time. It was only following the emergence of the United States Navy as a force capable of rivalling the most powerful European navies that relocation of the capital would no longer be proposed at the Congressional level. In the 2009 comedy film In the Loop, the character of Malcolm Tucker references the battle by saying "We [meaning the British] burned this tight-arsed city [meaning Washington] to the ground in 1814, and I'm all for doing it again" during a heated confrontation with a young staffer inside The White House.

Despacito🚨YouTube is an American video-sharing website headquartered in San Bruno, California. Since its establishment in 2005, the website has featured a "most viewed" section, which lists the most viewed videos on the site. Although the most viewed videos were initially viral videos, such as Evolution of Dance and Charlie Bit My Finger, the most viewed videos were increasingly related to music videos. In fact, since Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance", every video that has reached the top of the "most viewed YouTube videos" list has been a music video. Although the most viewed videos are no longer listed on the site, reaching the top of the list is still considered a tremendous feat. By June 21, 2015, only two videos, "Gangnam Style" and "Baby", had exceeded one billion views. However, three and a half months later, on October 7, ten videos had done so.[1] As of December 2017, 87 videos on the list have exceeded one billion views, with 20 of them exceeding two billion views; three of which exceed three billion views and one of which exceeds four billion views. "Despacito" became the first video to reach three billion views on August 4, 2017, followed by "See You Again" on August 6, 2017, and then on November 25, 2017, "Gangnam Style" became the third video to hit three billion views.[2][3][4] "Despacito" also became the first video to reach four billion views on October 11, 2017.[5] As of December 2017, the five fastest videos to reach the one billion view mark are "Hello" (87 days), "Despacito" (96 days), "Shape of You" (97 days), "Mi Gente" (102 days) and "Sorry" (136 days).[6] The five fastest videos to reach two billion views are "Despacito" (154 days), "Shape of You" (187 days), "Chantaje" (379 days), "Sorry" (394 days) and "See You Again" (515 days).[7] As of December 2017, Justin Bieber and Katy Perry each have four videos exceeding one billion views, while Taylor Swift, Calvin Harris, Shakira, Ariana Grande and Bruno Mars each have three, and Fifth Harmony, Psy, Adele, Ellie Goulding, The Weeknd, Ed Sheeran, Nicky Jam, Eminem, Maluma, J Balvin and Ricky Martin each have two. Swift, Perry and Sheeran are the only artists to have two videos exceeding two billion views. The following table lists the top 100 most viewed videos on YouTube, with each total rounded to the nearest 10 million views, as well as the creator and date of publication to YouTube.[A] The following table lists the current top 5 most viewed YouTube videos uploaded in each year, with each total rounded to the nearest ten million views, as well as the uploader and date of publication to YouTube.[L] As of December 2017, Katy Perry has the most appearances on the list with five, while Taylor Swift and Adele have three. Only Linkin Park (2007), Gummib?r/icanrockyourworld (2007) and Taylor Swift (2014) have two videos in the top 5 of a single year, with both the English and French versions of Gummib?r's The Gummy Bear Song being in the top five videos of 2007. The following table lists the last 15 videos to become YouTube's most viewed video, from October 2005 to the present. *The approximate number of views each video had when it became YouTube's most viewed video. Timeline of Most Viewed Videos (Oct 2005 - Dec 2017) 1 Most Viewed Video (Oct 2005 - Jun 2006) 1 Most Viewed Video (Apr 2006 - Jan 2010) 1 Most Viewed Video (Oct 2009 - Jan 2013) 1 Most Viewed Video (Jan 2012 - Dec 2017)